Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 1

Application no: 20/01829/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land Adjacent To Solar Farm, Court Drove, Overton, Hampshire

Proposal The installation of a 15m monopole supporting 3 no. antennas on support poles mounted to proposed crows-nest headframe, 4 no. cabinets and ancillary development, within a compound formed from 1.6m high close boarded timber fencing 25m x 10 m with a 3m wide access gate.

Registered: 9 July 2020 Expiry Date: 17 April 2021

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Bethan Wallington 01256 845361

Applicant: EE (UK) Ltd Agent: Mrs Susan Griffiths

Ward: Whitchurch, Overton and Laverstoke

Ward Member(s): Cllr Lucie Follett Maitland Cllr Colin Phillimore Cllr Ian Tilbury

Parish: OVERTON CP OS Grid Reference: 450782 150323

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design and siting and

would not result in significant impacts on the local landscape character and scenic quality of the area. As such the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Policy LBE1 of the Overton Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2029.

2. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue

overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety. As such

the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

4. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on biodiversity

and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

5. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on trees and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policy LBE1 of the Overton Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

General comments This application is brought to Development Control Committee in line with the scheme of delegation due to the Officers recommendation for approval and the number of objections received. Planning Policy The site lies outside of the Settlement Policy Boundary and within the open countryside. The site is located outside of but directly to the south of the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 2 (Achieving Sustainable Development) Section 4 (Decision-making) Section 10 (Supporting high quality communications) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Policy CN6 (Infrastructure) Policy CN9 (Transport) Overton Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2029 Policy LBE1 (Landscape, The Built Environment and Local Distinctiveness) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (March 2018) Landscape, Biodiversity & Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018) Heritage Supplementary Planning Document (2019)

Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Overton Village Design Statement (February 2002) Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. Description of Site The application site is located to the west of Basingstoke on an area of land known as Lordsfields Plantation to the north west of Overton and to the south west of Quidhampton. The field in which the site is located operates as a solar farm; planning permission having been granted in 2014 (planning permission 14/01777/FUL). To the north of the site lies the main railway line linking Basingstoke to Andover. A belt of landscaping and mature trees lie on either side of the railway track and form the field boundary with access from Court Drove, a single track to the east of the site. Public access extends along Court Drove to the east with the nearest Public Right of Way sitting approximately 475m to the west beyond intervening woodland and connects to the Harrow Way to the north of the site (by approximately 1km). The land to the north of the railway track falls within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The nearest residential property, Ridgewood, is positioned approximately 255m to the south, with the property, Tanelorn, lying approximately 270m to the south west. Both properties benefit from screening in the form of mature trees within their curtilage. Beyond a further belt of trees to the south of these properties lies the Overton Church of England Primary School. Due to the distance and intervening trees and buildings the application site is well screened. The fields surrounding the subject site are agricultural in nature. Proposal The application seeks planning permission for the installation of a 15m monopole of an olive brown colour and containing supporting antennas. At ground level five cabinets of a fir green colour are to be positioned adjacent to the monopole of varying sizes but cumulatively measuring 3.4m in width, a maximum of 1.2m in depth and a maximum of 1.9m in height. Ancillary development would include two inspection chambers either side of the monopole. Supporting information to the application states that the telecommunications apparatus is required as part of the network improvement programme to improve coverage and capacity in the area particularly along the railway line for the Emergency Services Network as well as local users noting that demand for coverage has increased with more people now working from home on a regular basis. Amended Plans Amended plans have been received which altered the design from a lattice tower to a thinner monopole and reduced the tower height from 20m to 15m. Close board fencing to enclose the compound has also been removed. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and Tree Survey was also submitted to support the development.

Consultations Cllr Tilbury: "There was an attempt to build a 25m high mast close to this location back in 2005 which after a campaign through the school we managed to get refused by the DC committee due to various concerns, particularly the visual impact and concerns over the anxiety around health issues. The application is BDB/61512. This site is closer to the school and in a highly visible location next to Court Drove which is a popular route for leisure and recreational purposes. I also understand that the landowner has not been consulted and has indicated they do not support this site, which I would have thought the applicant would have had the foresight to check first…" Overton Parish Council: "Objection - the parish council was concerned that the landowner's permission had not been sought before the application had been submitted. The impact of the mast on the NWD AONB was of concern - this area had to be protected. The mast would also be visible from most of the village and would impact on the landscape. The location was also close to a byway and was not secure. The lack of prior consultation with the borough councillors and parish council as well as the school was considered to be desultory. Whilst it was accepted that better communications and 5G were required, the placing of a mast in open countryside was not the answer. There were already two masts at the northern end of the village and it seemed that a mast sharing arrangement would be more appropriate." Landscape: Initial comments: Objections to impact on landscape character and visual amenity.

Comments on amendments: Objections to impact on landscape character and visual amenity.

Final comments: Objection as it would be a visual intrusion for users of the PRoW's Overton 5 and 6, as well as users of Court Drove. The location of the site adjacent to a national designation (AONB) reinforces the sensitivity of the local landscape character and the impact this would have on the visual amenity of that landscape. Trees: Initial Comments: Survey required.

Final Comments: None received. Biodiversity: Initial Comments: Survey required.

Final Comments: No objections subject to conditions Network Rail: Advise that the development contacts Network Rail prior to construction. Public Observations Twenty seven letters of objection have been received raising concerns on the following grounds (in summary): Impact on the character of the area/design

The 20m mast would completely disregard the beautiful rural character of the area. Although adjacent to the solar farm, this is screened whereas the height of the mast provides a different proposition.

The mast is too high and would unsightly and impact the public rights of way nearby.

The size of the 25m by 10m compound seems excessive.

The site is adjacent to an extremely popular lane used by walkers, runners, cyclists and horse-riders and it is the main link between the village and ancient Harrow Way just two fields away.

The proposed site seems a bad choice being on top of a hill.

The application form says the site cannot be seen from the public road/footpath.

The proposed site layout shows the fence as 1.8m in height however the application form states 1.6m.

Part 22 of the application form is incorrect as the mast would be seen from a public vantage points.

The application says it is not next to a walkway however whilst not technically a road, it is used by a vast amount of people.

The mast is right next to the railway bridge. Biodiversity

The site lies adjacent to the Court Drove Woodland Strip SINC which houses bats and hazel dormice and it is not known what effects phone mast may have on these protected species which is not reflected in the application.

The compound is be sited on a Stewardship Margin that is part of a Higher Level Stewardship scheme with Natural England. The site has been under stewardship for twenty years. There has been no account made for wildlife despite the fact that the proposed development will undo the conservation work carried out at the site over the last two decades.

Relationship to dwellings

The application states the nearest residential property is 255m to the south however it is 235m.

The application states this property and the next property (265m away) is screened by mature trees which is incorrect as these properties would see the proposal.

Ridgewood/1 Court Drove and Tanelorn/2 Court Drove will overlook the site where there is a break in the mature trees and hedgerow.

Other matters

The chaos and possible accidents to children going to and from the School are unthinkable.

There is anti-social behaviour and criminal activity in this area and concerns that teenagers may use this structure as a climbing frame.

There are other alternative sites that would better house the mast.

No ICNIRP drawings have been included in the application, only a certificate. Sight of the drawings with plotted lines should be given.

Close proximity to housing (240m) and school (300m) is particularly concerning with rollout of nonionizing radiation through the 5G network transmitting electromagnetic waves and implications on health.

EE already has a mast in Overton only a few hundred metres from the proposed site and therefore it is not understood why there is a need for another.

The applicant advises they sent a pre-application consultation letter to the Ward Councillors on the 14th May 2020 however this was not the case.

The application states that they did not need to consult the school because it is 300m away which is a subjective view as 300m is a short distance.

There was an application to build a phone mast in an adjacent field in 2005 (reference BDB/61512) which was refused on various grounds.

Only two properties in the whole village were given notice of this planning application (Ridgewood/1 Court Drove and Tanelorn House/2 Court Drove). No notice of the planning application was put which is not acceptable when the mast will be visible from across most the village.

Relevant Planning History 14/01777/FUL Construction and 25 year operation of a

solar farm and associated infrastructure for

connection to the local electricity

distribution network, temporary

construction compound, security fencing

and ecological and landscape works

Granted 18.12.2014

Assessment Principle of development Planning permission is sought for the installation of telecommunications infrastructure to support the growing demand upon these services from homes, businesses and the emergency services. Whilst there are no specific development plan policies to address the delivery of standalone telecommunications infrastructure, supporting text to Policy CN6 of the Local Plan does confirm that there is a need to provide necessary infrastructure, albeit in association with new development, and recognises the need to make provision of infrastructure for mobile broadband where possible and viable. The principle of the development is therefore considered acceptable however consideration is still required as to how the proposal accords with other policies of the development plan. These will be set out within the below assessment. Impact on the character of the area/design Policy EM1 states that development will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area concerned and must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected. Policy EM10 states that proposals will be required to respect the local environment and Policy LBE1 of the Overton Neighbourhood Plan sets out that development should be in keeping with the rural character of the area. The site lies upon land which provides a solar farm with wide field margins and solar panels extending west and south from the proposed positioning of the mast. To the north is the Basingstoke to Andover railway line and beyond the site to the north and east is agricultural land and to the west is woodland. Land to the north of the railway line is within the North Wessex Downs AONB however the application site does not fall within this protected area. To the south lies the edge of the settlement.

Despite the amendments to the development, the Landscape Officer has raised objection to the proposal, stating that although the tower has changed in style and in height, to compensate for the visual intrusion, the height of the pole in such a sensitive area is still considered unacceptable. The Landscape Officer remains of the view that the development would continue to form a visual intrusion for users of the PRoW's Overton 5 and 6, as well as users of Court Drove and that the location adjacent to a national designation (AONB) reinforces the sensitivity of the local landscape character and the impact this would have on the visual amenity of that landscape. In considering the concerns raised as to the landscape impact, the proposed tower would sit in the north eastern corner of the solar farm site. The original scheme for a 20m lattice mast and use of close board fencing at ground level would have resulted in an incongruous and adverse landscape impact at the edge of the settlement, however the scheme has since been significantly altered. The monopole would stand at 15m above ground level and would be of a thin tower design and brown in colour in order to mimic a telegraph pole and reduce the landscape impact. The cabinets at 1.9m in height would be afforded screening by the adjacent hedgerow and will appear as ground level structures with the close boarded fencing also having been removed from the application. It is also noted the cabinets sit lower in height than the solar panels located within the adjacent solar farm so would not be prominent to public view. Overton Footpaths 5 and 6 lie some 475m to the north and west of the application site beyond the solar farm. It is therefore accepted that the tower would be visible in passing views to the users of Court Drove and to the public rights of way however these would be passing views and the impact has been notably reduced through the amended design. In balancing the need for improved network coverage and capacity against the landscape harm, it is considered that the impact upon the landscape character and visual quality of the area is not so adversely unacceptable as to justify refusal of planning permission. For these reasons, the development is considered acceptable and in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan and Policy LBE1 of the Neighbourhood Plan. Impact on designated heritage assets Local Authorities are required by Sections 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Area) Act 1990 to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the setting of heritage assets. This is reflected locally within Policy EM11 which has regard to the importance of natural features and spaces that contribute to the character and appearance of a designated asset. There are no listed buildings nearby or Conservation Areas impacted by the development. The nearest listed buildings are 41 Kingsclere Road (Grade II) sited 590m to the south east and the barn 30m West of Court farm which is also Grade II listed, sited 640m to the south east. Laverstoke Park is a Registered Park and Garden positioned approximately 1.43km to the south west. An informal discussion with the Historic Environment Team has confirmed that, by virtue of distance, intervening trees and lower level landscaping, views towards the site will be sufficiently restricted. Impact on neighbouring amenities Policy EM10 of the Local Plan requires developments to provide high levels of amenity for proposed occupants and neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light.

The nearest residential property is located some 255m to the south of the development site which is name Ridgewood. To the west of this property lies Tanelorn. The distances of the development from these properties has been disputed with the public representations but is confirmed by the Officer to be correct. It is acknowledged that the mast would be visible in distant views from the properties, however given the distance, together with the intervening solar farm and landscaping, it is considered that the development would not give rise to harmful impacts on neighbouring amenity sufficient to substantiate refusal of the application. As such, the development is considered in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan in this regard. Highways and Parking Policy CN9 of the Local Plan encourages developments to seek to minimise the need to travel, promote opportunities for sustainable transport modes, improve accessibility to services and support a transition to a low carbon future. The proposed development would not impact upon any parking arrangements and would not give rise to any highway safety concerns given its containment within the solar farm site. The site would be accessed 90m to the south of the development through a field gate on the western side of Court Drove. Therefore whilst there would be traffic during construction and occasional movements for maintenance, the development would not be traffic generating to a level that would have adverse impacts. The proposal accords with Policy CN9 of the Local Plan. Natural Environment

Trees Policy EM1 of the Local Plan seeks to provide protection to the landscape character of the borough having regard to visual amenity and scenic quality but also giving consideration to natural features such as trees and hedgerows which also have ecological functions. To the north of the proposed development is a belt of hedgerow and trees that afford a natural screening between the solar farm and railway line. Two trees (saplings) are sited close to the development (approximately 2.8m from the cabinets and 6.5m from the monopole). In response to a request from the Tree Officer, an Arboricultural Survey and Method Statement has been submitted by Blythe Valley which provides general principles for how nearby trees would be protected such as through tree protection fencing, ground protection, works within Root Protection Areas (RPA) to be conducted in accordance with methodologies in the document such as hand digging, no storage of materials within exclusion zones and no fires or herbicides used. An Arboricultural Clerk of Works appointed by Beacon Communications would also oversee the works as set out within the survey. The hedgerow adjacent to the site would not be pruned although some ground clearance would be required as confirmed by the agent. The development would not harm any root protection area of these trees given their small nature. The development is sited in excess of 15m away from the Court Drove Woodland where there is an intervening highway. Whilst no further comments have been received from the Tree Officer, the submitted documents appear to show that sufficient measures have been taken to protect the trees. Therefore, the development is considered to be in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan and Policy LBE1 of the Neighbourhood Plan.

Biodiversity The Local Planning Authority has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have full regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity which extends to being mindful of the legislation that considers protected species and their habitats and to the impact of the development upon sites designated for their ecological interest. These requirements are also reflected within the NPPF and Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. Policy EM4 establishes that proposals will only be permitted where significant harm to biodiversity can be avoided or adequately mitigated unless there is a demonstrated overriding public need. The application was initially submitted without an Ecological Survey therefore comments from the Biodiversity Officer requested that such a survey be undertaken due to the proposed development lying in proximity to a tree belt (Court Drove Woodland Strip SINC) which is designated for supporting dormice. It was also noted that Stone Curlews are known to be present within the wider area and it was uncertain whether reptiles are likely to be using the grassland. A Preliminary Ecological Survey has been submitted which sets out a number of recommendations in order to protect habitats and species such as birds, reptiles and other terrestrial mammals. The Biodiversity Officer has reviewed this report and considered the contents acceptable providing that recommendations provided within the Survey are secured by way of planning condition which is considered reasonable and necessary. The Biodiversity Officer also recommended that an Ecological Construction Method Statement is submitted prior to construction to consider ecological risk, practical measures, location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity, timing of construction when ecologists need to present, use of protective fencing and a reptile and dormouse mitigation strategy for site clearance. This is also considered reasonable and necessary to impose to ensure that the development does not adverse harm biodiversity (see conditions 4 and 5). The Biodiversity Officer also noted that if this site is located within the margin of the current solar farm, it will impact/remove any of the measures previously conditioned to provide biodiversity enhancements secured in association with the solar farm development. The proposed development would be in the field margin outside of the solar farm and sit mainly outside of the application site for the solar farm development under 14/01777/FUL where biodiversity measures were previously secured. Notwithstanding this, the application secures an updated position to ensure that no adverse impacts upon biodiversity arise. With conditions imposed, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. Pollution/Health Implications Policy EM12 establishes that development will only be permitted where it does not result in pollution which is detrimental to quality of life or poses unacceptable risk to health or the natural environment. The Government asked the National Radiological Protection Board to set up an Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones to consider concerns about health effects from the use of mobile phones, base stations and transmitters. The resulting report, The Stewart Report, was published in May 2000. In respect of base stations, the report concludes that 'the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be a small fraction of the guidelines. However, there can be

indirect adverse effects on their well-being in some cases'. They also say that the possibility of harm cannot be ruled out with confidence and that the gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach. The Government indicated that it accepted the precautionary approach advised by the group. The Government's acceptance of this precautionary approach is limited to the specific recommendations in the Group's report and the Government's response to them. These recommendations stated that emissions from mobile phone base stations should meet ICNIRP (Internal Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) guidelines for public exposure. It should be noted that it is the Government's firm view that the planning system is not the place for determining health safeguards and that it remains central Government's responsibility to protect public health. In the Government's view, if a proposed mobile phone base station meets the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure, it should not be necessary for a Local Planning Authority, in processing an application for planning permission or prior approval, to consider further health aspects and concerns about them. The applicants have stated that their proposal would be within these ICNIRP guidelines and it would therefore be considered unreasonable to refuse this application on health grounds. Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The required forms have been submitted for CIL contributions to be calculated if applicable. From these forms, it would appear that the development would not CiL liable since there would be no increase in floorspace. Other matters A number of other comments were made through the public observations in response to the application which will be addressed below.

Stewardship Margin Scheme. One representation raised concern that the compound is sited on a Stewardship Margin scheme supported by Natural England. The development did not trigger a planning consultation with Natural England due to its scale and location however online mapping does indicate that the site is located upon land subject to a Countryside Stewardship scheme. Reconciling the development against this location where financial incentives are provided for environmental improvement would be a matter for the applicant and/or land owner to address with Natural England and sits outside of the planning process. It is notable that, had the site not been located upon land subject to a Countryside Stewardship scheme, the development itself would have benefitted from permitted development rights afforded for the erection of telecommunications development within Schedule 2, Part 16, Class A of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). These permitted development rights provide for the installation, alteration or replacement of any electronic communications apparatus that does not exceed 15m in height (amongst other criteria).

Refusal of a phone mast in an adjacent field in 2005 (reference BDB/61512)

Reference has been made within the public observations that a phone mast has previously been refused within proximity to the current application site. The planning register reveals that an application for a mast was refused in 2005 under reference BDB/61512. This application was sited 635 south west of the application site and included a mast that was 25m in height and of a differing design. The application was refused on two grounds. The first reason being the siting in close proximity and visible to neighbouring properties and the nearby school which would increase general anxiety about health effects and thereby lead to loss of amenity and diminution of quality of life (health effects have been covered in the above assessment). The second reason was due to the limited degree of public consultation and that other locations would be of preference to the siting which was proposed. There has been significant new guidance and legislation since 2005 relevant to the assessment of this current application against which this development has been considered acceptable.

Consultation with the landowner. Concern was raised that there had been no consultation with the landowner. It is however confirmed on the application form that the landowner was served notice on 8th July 2020 advising them of the development proposed.

Pre-application consultation letters to the Ward Councillors.

Concern was raised that the applicants did not send any pre-application consultation letters to the Ward Members. In response, the Agent has confirmed that such correspondence was sent on the 14th May 2020 and has provided copies as evidence. In any event, the Local Planning Authority consult relevant Ward Members and third parties as part of the consideration of the planning application.

Consultation with Overton Primary School. Concern was raised that Overton Primary School were not consulted because the school is positioned 300m from the site. It is confirmed that the school was consulted by the Local Planning Authority on the 24th July 2020. No comments from the school have been received.

Insufficient public consultation.

Concern has been raised that only two properties in Overton were given notice of this planning application (Ridgewood/1 Court Drove and Tanelorn House/2 Court Drove) and that a site notice was not posted which was considered unacceptable when the mast will be visible from across most the village. It is confirmed that a site notice was sent to the agent to be displayed however the posting of the notice is not a statutory requirement for this particular development in this location. Furthermore the Local Planning Authority is only required to notify neighbours with a boundary contiguous to the site and this was undertaken. In addition to the neighbours, Overton Primary School was also notified.

Anti-social behaviour and criminal activity. Public observations state that there is anti-social behaviour and criminal activity in this area with concerns that teenagers may use this structure as a climbing frame and stating that there could also be chaos and possible accidents to children going to and from the School. The proposed mast would be sited outside of, but within immediate proximity to the solar farm site which is positioned beyond the school to the north along Court Drive and within the confinements of the agricultural field. This is on private land rather than on any direct street frontage which receives footfall (i.e. akin to roadside masts and cabinet equipment) and is not within any public open space therefore access to the site would constitute trespass. Whilst there would be traffic associated with the construction and maintenance of the mast using Court Drove, this would be low level where Court Drove can already be accessed by vehicles.

Alternative sites

Public observations suggest that there are alternative sites that would better house the mast. Supporting information to the application has set out that alternative sites were investigated for the positioning of the mast. Alternative sites were discounted for reasons which include interference with Network Rail communication systems, the need for taller masts due to surrounding vegetation and topography (e.g. 30m+) to achieve the same coverage or insufficient space for mast sharing. Notwithstanding this, the application has been submitted to consider the site as proposed and therefore assessed as to the acceptability of this proposal as detailed above. Pre-Commencement Conditions The recommendation proposes pre-commencement planning conditions therefore in accordance with section 100ZA of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Pre-commencement Conditions) Regulations 2018, the Local Planning Authority served notice upon the applicant to seek agreement to the imposition of such conditions. Notice was served on the 18th August 2021 and confirmation of the conditions were agreed on 18th August 2021. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans:

Location Plan (drawing no. 78583_SOLAR FARM GF_001 SITE LOCATION - Issue A6)

Proposed Site Access (drawing no. 78583_SOLAR FARM GF_002 SITE ACCESS ROUTE – Issue A5) Proposed Site Layout (drawing no. 78583_SOLAR FARM GF_003 SITE LAYOUT – Issue A6) Proposed Site Elevation (drawing no. 78583_SOLAR FARM GF_004 SITE ELEVATION – Issue A6).

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 Notwithstanding the details submitted, the materials to be used in the construction

of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture to those on the application form, supporting information (emailed dated 18th August confirming proposed colours for cabinets and mast).

REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Policy LBE1 of the Overton Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2029.

4 No development shall take place (including ground works, vegetation clearance) until an Ecological Construction Method Statement (ECMS) (or equivalent document) is submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The ECMS shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: 1. Ecological risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities. 2. Identification of 'biodiversity protection zones'. 3. Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working

practices) to avoid or reduce impacts during construction. 4. The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity

features (e.g. daylight working hours only starting one hour after sunrise and ceasing one hour before sunset).

5. The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works.

6. Responsible persons and lines of communication. 7. Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs. 8. A reptile and dormouse mitigation strategy for the site clearance works.

The approved ECMS shall be strictly adhered to and implemented throughout the construction period. REASON: To ensure that ecological mitigation measures are delivered and that protected/priority species and habitats are safeguarded in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and in order for the Council to comply with Part 3 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.

5 All bird and badger protection and mitigation measures shall be carried out in

accordance with Table 7 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Survey submitted by Arbtech dated 11/06/2021. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved report. REASON: To ensure that ecological mitigation measures are delivered and that protected species are safeguarded in accordance with the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and in order for the Council to comply with Part 3 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.

6 Protective measures, including fencing, ground protection, supervision, working

procedures and special engineering solutions shall be carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural Survey and Method Statement produced by Blythe Valley (dated 3rd June 2021). REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in

the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029 and Policy LBE1 of the Overton Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the application

considering the imposition of conditions (in accordance with paragraphs 54-57).

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions

that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency

4. Network Rail strongly recommends that the developer contacts Network Rail's

Asset Protection team via AssetProtectionWessex@networkrail.co.uk prior to any works commencing on site with a view to enter into an Asset Protection Agreement to enable approval of detailed works. More information can also be obtained from the Network Rail website at https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/looking-after-the-railway/asset-protection-and-optimisation/.

Location plan

Proposed Site Plan

Proposed Development

Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 2

Application no: 20/01847/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land At Folly Farm, Overton Road, North Waltham Hampshire

Proposal Removal of existing office building (B1a), and the erection of a detached dwelling; with associated parking, turning, landscaping, private amenity space, modified access from the highway and associated change of use of land

Registered: 13 July 2020 Expiry Date: 7 September 2020

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Jemma Cox 01256 845304

Applicant: Mr and Mrs P Lawrence

Agent: Mr Mark Pettitt

Ward: Oakley and The Candovers

Ward Member(s): Cllr Diane Taylor Cllr Hannah Golding Cllr Paul Gaskell

Parish: NORTH WALTHAM CP

OS Grid Reference: 455219 146464

Recommendation: the application be REFUSED for the following reason:

1 The development would result in the urbanisation of the rural character of the

area as a result of the built form and associated domestic paraphernalia, as well as adversely affecting the agrarian landscape character of this part of the Borough. It is not considered that the proposed development could be adequately mitigated against. The proposed development would therefore result in unacceptable adverse impacts on the landscape character and visual amenity of the area and as such would be contrary to Sections 12 and 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM1, Policy EM10 2a) and c) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

General Comments This application has been called to the Development Control Committee at the request of Councillor Frost and Councillor Taylor for the following reasons: "We would like to call in the above planning application as we believe that the applications are able to meet the requirements for landscaping. There are no objections from the local residents or Parish Council and we would like to Development Control Committee to consider this proposal."

Planning Policy The application site is located outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary and as such lies within the countryside.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 2 (Achieving Sustainable Development) Section 4 (Decision-making) Section 5 (Delivering a sufficient supply of homes) Section 9 (Promoting sustainable transport) Section 11 (Making effective use of land) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 14 (Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption on Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) Policy SS6 (New Housing in the Countryside) Policy CN1 (Affordable Housing) Policy CN3 (Housing Mix for Market Housing) Policy CN6 (Infrastructure) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM9 (Water Efficiency) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Parking Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (March 2018) Housing Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018 Landscape, Biodiversity & Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Landscape Character Assessment (May 2021) Water Environment Regulations 2017 Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 Description of Site The application site is split into two parcels. Site P1 is a rectangular parcel of undeveloped agricultural land extending to approximately 0.2ha located immediately north of Folly Farm. To the west, the site is bounded by the access drive off Waltham Lane serving Folly Farm and several residential properties.

Agricultural land surrounds the site further west and north, as well as to the immediate east. Immediately south, the site is separated from Folly Farm by a group of trees, beyond which are situated a number of larger agricultural style buildings and hardstanding associated with Folly Farm. From these buildings there is a variety of commercial (light industry and storage and distribution) uses in operation. Some of the buildings are also in agricultural use, used for the storage of grain. The site is slightly elevated when viewed from Waltham Lane. Site P2 comprises a detached single storey timber-built office building. There is an existing gravel apron around the building with a stand of trees to the rear (west) and hedging to the front and side (east and south). The boundary to the south is open to an adjacent detached pair of buildings in Class B8 use. To the east there is the dwelling known as Folly Farm. Folly Farm Bungalows are located to the north. Proposal The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a detached five-bedroom dwelling with associated parking, turning and private amenity space on site P1 following the demolition of the office building on site P2. Notably, the office building, which is to be removed, benefits from extant permission by virtue of the General Permitted Development Order, for its conversion to 1no dwellinghouse. Within the site, the proposed dwelling would be orientated towards the west with a new vehicular access to serve the property off the existing access drive. A detached single storey, double garage would be located within the north-western corner of the site. The proposed dwelling would be 'L' shaped, with the principal parts of the dwelling comprising of two storeys with one and a half storey and single storey projections to the side and rear. Overall, the proposed dwelling would measure a maximum of 18.8m wide, 21.9m deep with a maximum ridge height of 9m. The main part of the dwelling features rooms in the roof, incorporating dormer windows within the front roof slope. Eaves dormers would be located within the one and half storey projection. Externally, the dwelling would be constructed in brick and flint with a plain tile roof. The proposed detached garage would also be finished in brick with a plain tiled roof. The following information has been submitted in support of the application:

Planning and Design Statement

Landscape Visual Appraisal (updated; submitted 15.06.2021)

Nitrogen Nutrient Assessment

Nitrate Mitigation Strategy (updated; submitted 18.06.2021)

Biodiversity Impact Assessment (submitted 15.06.2021)

Ecological Appraisal (submitted 15.06.2021)

Dusk Emergency Survey (submitted 15.06.2021)

Hedgerow Survey (submitted 15.06.2021) Amended plans were received on 09.11.2020 which comprise:

Amended location plan (blue land added),

Amended site layout

Revised design scheme: - Proposed garage structure moved further south within the site.

- Omission of eaves dormers from northern elevation. A further revised block plan was submitted on the 30th November 2020 which included the location of the proposed package treatment plant. Further amended plans were received on the 15th June 2021 which comprise:

Amended site layout; proposed garage structure moved back to the north-western corner of the site.

Additional mitigation planting to include a 5m shrub border to the north and eastern boundaries, increased buffer zone to the farm to the south comprising of an area 'left to stay wild'.

Consultations North Waltham Parish Council: "North Waltham Parish Council had no objection to the removal of the existing office building or the erection of a new dwelling. The Council felt that the proposed new dwelling was well designed and would fit well with the existing farmhouse and were pleased that there would not be an additional access point on to the highway. However, there was no information on how waste and grey water would be managed and the Parish Council felt this should be addressed prior to permission being granted." Natural England: Initial Comments: Further information required to determine impacts on designated sites.

Interim Comments: Further information required to determine impacts on designated sites.

Final Comments: No objection subject to securing appropriate mitigation. Landscape: Initial Comments: Objection.

Final Comments: Objection. Forestry Commission: Standing advice applies. Environmental Health: No objection subject to conditions. HCC Highways: No objection subject to conditions. Joint Waste Client Team: No objection. Biodiversity: Initial Comments: Additional information required.

Final Comments: No objection subject to conditions. Public Observations None received.

Relevant Planning History 21/02510/GPDOFF Notification of proposed change of

use from Class B1(a) office to a

Single Dwellinghouse (Use Class C3)

Pending Consideration

21/02528/FUL External alterations

Pending Consideration

20/00385/FUL Removal of existing office building

(B1a) at Folly Farm and erection of a

detached dwelling with associated

parking, turning, landscaping, private

amenity space, modified access from

the highway and associated change

of use of land at land opposite

Crawley Copse

Withdrawn 16.04.2020

19/00884/GPDOFF Notification of proposed change of

use of Class B1(a) office to 1 no.

dwellinghouse (Class C3)

Granted 24.05.2019

Application 19/00884/GPDOFF is extant and permits the conversion of the existing building (site P2) to 1no dwellinghouse. Assessment Principle of Development Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must have regard to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the development plan for the area is the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and at a national level, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) constitutes guidance which the Local Planning Authority (LPA) must have regard to. The NPPF does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making but is a material consideration in any subsequent determination.

Housing Land Supply In providing for sustainable development, the NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to identify a five-year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. For the Borough Council, and in line with the Housing Delivery Test published in January 2021, a 5% buffer should be added to the borough's supply. Against this requirement, at the current time, the council is unable to demonstrate that it has 5 years' worth of deliverable sites. This means that policies relating to housing delivery in the borough's adopted Local Plan, including Policies SS1 and SS6, are currently considered to be out of date and are afforded limited weight in the decision-taking process.

Planning applications will therefore be considered in line with paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF which states that where relevant policies are considered out of date permission will be granted unless 'the application of policies in the Framework (NPPF) that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed' (para 11 d(i)) or, 'any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole' (para 11 d(ii)). The footnote to this statement is clear that the protected areas or important assets referenced in 11d(i) are those policies in the NPPF relating to habitats sites and/or designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest; Green Belt, Local Green Space, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a National Park (or within the Broads Authority) or defined as Heritage Coast; irreplaceable habitats; designated heritage assets (and other heritage assets of archaeological interest); and areas at risk of flooding or coastal change. The application site is located in an area which has the potential to impact on habitat sites. Consideration of this is carried out later in this report. This report will evaluate the application against the relevant Development Plan Policies and an assessment of the development in light of the above, and the balance required by paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF will be given in the 'Planning Balance and Conclusion' section of this report.

Local Plan The Local Plan (paragraph 4.70) is explicit in its aims 'to direct development to within the identified Settlement Policy Boundaries and specific site allocations. The application site is however located outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary (SPB) and is within part of the borough which is designated as countryside as per Policy SS1 (Scale and distribution of new housing) of the Local Plan. Within the countryside it is the intention to maintain the existing open nature of the borough's countryside, to prevent the coalescence of settlements and resist the encroachment of development into rural areas. The countryside is therefore subject to a more restrictive policy. Policy SS1 sets out a spatial strategy for the Local Authority to meet its full housing need over the Plan period. The strategy is principally based upon the development of allocated Greenfield sites and the redevelopment of land in the towns and villages. Development in the countryside is generally restricted unless specific circumstances apply as set out within Policy SS6 (New Housing in the Countryside) which sets out when it is appropriate to allow new housing development. The first criteria to this Policy addresses development on ‘previously developed land’. Site P1 is agricultural land and is therefore excluded from the definition of previously developed land as set out in the NPPF. The development therefore does not comply with Policy SS6(a). Criteria b), c), d), and f) address schemes for rural exception affordable housing, the re-use of redundant or disused permanent buildings, replacement dwellings, or dwellings that relate to an agricultural worker respectively. This proposal is not for any of these forms of development therefore would not accord with these criteria. In addressing the remaining criteria to Policy SS6, the most relevant criteria to the development proposed would appear to be criterion SS6(e). Policy SS6(e) states that 'small scale residential proposals of a scale and type that meet a locally agreed need provided that:

ix) It is will related to the existing settlement and would not result in an isolated form of

development, and x) The development will respect the qualities of the local landscape and be sympathetic to its character and visual quality; and xi) The development will respect and relate to the character, form and appearance of surrounding development, and respect the amenities of the residents of neighbouring properties.'

The starting point for a development under criterion e) of SS6 is to establish whether the development is small scale (i.e. four dwellings or fewer). The development proposed meets this requirement. It is then necessary to determine whether there is any locally agreed need for the proposed dwelling outside of the settlement policy boundary. This is where the proposal must meet a specific and clearly identified unmet housing need in the local area in terms of number, size type and tenure. No supporting evidence has been provided; therefore, it is not possible to fully appraise the development in accordance with the requirements of SS6e). As such, the principle of the development is not supported by the Local Plan. Nevertheless, it is noted that site P2 benefits from an extant permission for conversion of the existing office building to residential use following the grant of application 19/00884/GPDOFF. Whilst the proposed dwelling would be sited on a separate parcel of land (P1), the intention of the application is to replace this office building (P2) with the new proposed dwelling. In that sense, the principle for 1no additional dwelling at Folly Farm has been established. The extant permission is a significant material consideration and represents a plausible fallback position. Had the application been otherwise acceptable, a condition could have been reasonably imposed to secure the demolition of the existing office building, in ensuring that the development did not result in a net increase in the number of dwellings approved at the wider Folly Farm complex.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The NPPF sets out the Government's planning policy for England and places sustainable development at the heart of the decision-taking process incorporating objectives for economic, social and environmental protection. These objectives seek to balance growth and local community needs against protection of the natural, built and historic environment. For rural housing, paragraphs 78-80 of the NPPF are the most relevant to the consideration of this proposal for new dwellings in the countryside. Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the viability of rural communities. Furthermore, Paragraph 80 of the NPPF states that 'Planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless one or more of the following circumstances apply: a) there is a need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm

business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside; b) the development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would

be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets; c) the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and enhance its

immediate setting; d) the development would involve the subdivision of an existing residential dwelling; or e) the design is of exceptional quality, in that it:

- is truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, and would help raise standards of design more generally in rural area; and - would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to defining characteristics of the local area'.

In addressing the proposed development, the first consideration is whether the site is in an isolated location. The NPPF does not provide a definition of what constitutes 'isolated' development therefore in considering whether or not the current application site is 'isolated', reference has been given to case law. The term 'isolated' was considered by the Court of Appeal who upheld a High Court decision in the case of Braintree DC v SSCLG [2018] Civ 610 ('the Braintree case') which concluded that the word 'isolated' should be given its ordinary meaning as being 'far away from other places, buildings and people; remote' and that in the context of paragraph 80 of the NPPF 'isolated' simply connotes a dwelling that is physically separate or remote from a settlement. Whether, in a particular case, a group of dwellings constitutes a settlement, or a 'village', for the purposes of the policy will again be a matter of fact and planning judgment for the decision-maker. The Court rejected the argument that the word 'isolated' as set out within the NPPF could have a dual meaning, being physically isolated or functionally isolated (isolated from services and facilities). In applying this guidance to this current case, it is noted that the application site does not form part of an existing cluster of dwellings that you would expect to see in places such as a hamlet, village or settlement. In this instance, it is acknowledged that the application site is located within and adjacent to an existing farmstead complex, comprising of a mixture of agricultural, commercial and residential uses. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the proposed dwelling would be, both visually and physically, separated from any meaningful grouping of buildings or dwellings and would be isolated. When considering the location of the site from an aerial point of view, the eastern edge of the Settlement Policy Boundary for North Waltham is located approximately 807m to the east of Site P1. By virtue of the site’s physical and visual separation, it is considered that the application site is not well related to North Waltham, which is the closest settlement. On this basis, it is considered that the proposed development would not contribute to the enhancement or maintenance of a viable rural community and would result in an isolated form of development, by virtue of being far away and remote from a settlement. The proposed development is therefore contrary to paragraph 80 of the NPPF where it does not accord with any of the detailed exceptional criteria therein. However, as set out above, site P2 does benefit from an extant permission for one dwelling, which is a material consideration. The development of one dwelling that is no more or less isolated than the current proposal is therefore already established at the site. It would therefore be unreasonable to refuse permission on the grounds of the isolated location given this fallback position. In addressing the proposal against the wider objectives of sustainable development of the NPPF and Policy SD1 of the Local Plan, the erection of the dwelling would provide limited economic benefit to contribute towards the local economy and whilst social aspects would be made through the contribution to the local housing stock, these benefits would be limited. Environmental improvements could be secured through condition in the form of new planting providing biodiversity gains and ensuring energy efficiency, although again these benefits would be limited. Matters of accessibility are

discussed later in this report, however it is noted that access to services and facilities would likely be heavily reliant on the use of the private car.

Conclusions on the Principle of Development There is conflict with Local Plan Policy SS6 with regard to permitting new residential development in the countryside. The proposals cannot therefore be considered to be in accordance with the Development Plan. However as the council does not have a five year HLS the tilted balance of paragraph 11 d) of the NPPF needs to be applied; that planning permission should be granted unless protected areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or any adverse impacts of approving planning permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The Planning Balance and Conclusion part of this report will evaluate the proposal in relation to the tilted balance required by the NPPF. Notwithstanding this, site P2 does benefit from the prior approval for the conversion of the existing office to one dwelling in accordance with the provisions of the General Permitted Development Order. This represents a plausible fallback position and is therefore material in the consideration of this planning application. Impact on the character of the area/design The NPPF states that the creation of high-quality buildings is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve, with good design a key aspect of sustainable development. Paragraph 130 goes on to state that development should establish or maintain a strong sense of place, be sympathetic to local character and history and be visually attractive. Paragraph 134 states that permission should be refused for development that is not well designed, especially taking into account local design standards or guidance contained within SPDs. Significant weight should be given to outstanding of innovative designs which promote high levels of sustainability or help raise the standards of design more generally in an area, so long as they fit in with the overall form and layout of their surroundings. Local Plan Policy EM1 states that proposals should be sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area. They must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape. Proposals must respect the sense of place, sense of tranquillity or remoteness, and the quiet enjoyment of the landscape from Public Rights of Way. Policy EM10 states that proposals will be required to respect the local environment, contribute to the streetscene and be visually attractive. Policy EM10 also seeks high quality development across the borough, based upon a robust design-led process and a clear understanding of the local identity and context of development to create successful, inviting places where people want to live, work and enjoy themselves. The Design and Sustainability SPD sets out the key urban design and sustainability principles for the borough. These include:

Ensuring that new development is of high quality and well designed.

Improves the standard and distinctiveness of architecture in the borough.

Ensuring that the character of rural settlements are maintained and enhanced by ensuring that the new development responds positively to their distinctive and local characters.

The site is located within the Dummer and Popham Down Landscape Character Area.

This is described as comprising a landscape of scattered farmsteads and villages linked

by a network of narrow lands, with arable fields and scattered woodlands.

The proposed new dwelling would be located in a prominent location, highly visible from the public highway. Whilst the backdrop of the workshop and agricultural buildings to the south would be visible through the tree line during winter months, the dwelling would be viewed in isolation during the other times of year. Overall, it is considered that the proposed new dwelling would encroach into and erode the agrarian characteristics of the landscape which the site sits within. Furthermore, in combination with the scale of the development, including the scale of the proposed dwelling, detached garage, hardstanding, private amenity areas and boundary treatments, the introduction of a domestic form of development in this location would result in unacceptable urbanising impacts, to the detriment of the surrounding landscape character. A Landscape Visual Appraisal has been submitted in support of the application. This concludes that the proposed dwelling on site P1 could be successfully integrated into the surrounding rural landscape without any significant adverse effect on the established landscape character and visual amenity. Mitigation planting is proposed as a way of delivering this, which can, over the years, change the visual impact of development on the landscape character. To this end, the submitted plans illustrate a 5m shrub border to the northern and eastern boundaries, with an area some 6m in depth to the south to be left to stay wild as an intervening feature between the proposed dwelling and the Folly Farm complex. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the proposed development would, introduce residential development to a height of 9m and 21.9m in depth into an area of undeveloped open countryside to the detriment of the rural characteristics of the landscape. Officers therefore do not agree with the submitted document that the proposed development could be satisfactorily mitigated in this location. It is not considered that the current proposals represent a betterment to the fall-back position relating to the conversion of the modest existing office building which is located within closer proximity to nearby residential properties and is much better screened from view by virtue of existing vegetation. As such, the fallback position does not, in landscape terms, justify the creation of a new dwelling on site P1. Whilst there are a few residential properties located at Folly Farm, the overriding character of the immediate area is that of agricultural and commercial uses. Where there are residential properties, there is no prevailing architectural character or appearance. In regard to the physical appearance of the proposed dwelling and garage, considered in isolation as buildings as opposed to their visual impact on the surroundings, many of the residential properties within the village of North Waltham are characterised by the use of brick, flint and timber framing, clay tiles and slate. Visually, it is considered that the proposed dwelling would be in keeping with the general vernacular of the wider area. As such, there are no overriding concerns with regards to the design and appearance of the dwelling and its garage per se. Nevertheless, had all other matters been acceptable, then details of the proposed materials could have been secured by conditions to ensure that the development is of a high quality. In terms of the proposed new built form, it is acknowledged that the proposed dwelling is large. However, it is considered that it would be proportionate to the plot. Notwithstanding this, the impacts on the surrounding landscape character and visual amenity would be exacerbated by the overall scale and bulk of the development, with the principal parts of the dwelling comprising of 2 and half storeys and by virtue of the

forward position of the proposed detached garage. As such, the proposed dwelling which would sit within a plot that also contains its associated domestic paraphernalia would not respond positively to the character of the area, failing to integrate effectively with its surroundings and would detract from the rural character of the area. Overall, it is considered that the development in its context would not represent a high level of design that would respond positively to the local landscape and local distinctiveness. In this instance, it is not considered that the resultant impacts on the landscape character can be successfully mitigated. The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM1, Policy EM10 2a) and c) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018). Natural Environment

Biodiversity The Council has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have full regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity which extends to being mindful of the legislation that considers protected species and their habitats and to the impact of the development upon sites designated for their ecological interest. These requirements are also reflected within the NPPF (paragraph 180) and Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. - European Protected Species (Nitrogen Neutrality)

The application site is located within the catchment of the River Test which ultimately drains to the Solent therefore has potential to contribute to levels of nitrate entering groundwater flows generated by wastewater. There is evidence that the high levels of nutrients are causing eutrophication to the internationally designated Solent Water Special Protection Area and Special Areas of Conservation, important for its habitats and bird species and therefore has a likely significant effect of the conservation status of these designated sites. These areas are afforded protection under the Water Environment Regulations 2017 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) (the 'Habitats Regulations') to which the Local Planning Authority must have regard when determining the application. The identified impact is currently subject to work commissioned by Local Planning Authorities in association with Natural England, the Environment Agency and water companies. As such, uncertainty remains as to the potential for future housing developments across the Solent region to exacerbate these impacts creating a risk to the future conservation status. Therefore it is currently necessary for new development to achieve nutrient neutrality as a means of ensuring that development does not add to existing nutrient burdens and provides certainty that the whole of the scheme is deliverable in line with the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. In the absence of any strategic mitigation strategy being adopted by the Council, Natural England advises that to achieve nutrient neutrality, individual developments must demonstrate how a scheme would not add to nutrient burdens through implementation of site-specific mitigation. Where there is a likelihood of significant effects or there are uncertainties, a competent authority (i.e. the Local Planning Authority) should fully assess (by way of an "appropriate assessment") the implications of the proposal in view of the conservation

objectives for the European sites in order to fulfil its statutory duties under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations. Appropriate assessments must contain complete, precise and definitive findings and conclusions capable of removing all reasonable scientific doubt as to the effects of the works proposed on the protected site concerned and ensure that the proposal will not affect the integrity of the international sites. In order to achieve nutrient neutrality, and following extensive discussions with Natural England, the applicant has submitted supporting information to set out how the development would mitigate the likely significant effect to a satisfactory level. The mitigation scheme comprises the treatment of wastewater by Package Treatment Plant (PTP). As a result of the PTP's efficiency rate (71.1%), the development would result in a decrease of 2.311 kg/Total Nitrogen/year. The nearest foul water drainage connection is a significant distance from the application site and therefore is not a feasible option on this site in any event. The Applicant has provided a long term monitoring and maintenance strategy for the PTP which confirms the following:

Funding will be the responsibility of the existing owners or any successors in title thereafter. This includes installation of the PTP, maintenance/management checks and any future replacement of the unit. The facility will not be shared with any other property and it will only serve the proposed dwelling.

The current owners or any successors in title would be responsible for the maintenance, management and replacement of the PTP over the lifetime of the development.

General maintenance of the PTP will be carried out in line with Building Regulations (Part H 2010 - BS EN 12566) which state that regular emptying and maintenance of small sewage treatment plants must be undertaken by the homeowner at least once per year, or as per the manufacturer's guidelines.

A service contract, to be appointed by the existing land owner or any successor in title would be put in place with a competent specialist (recommended by the PTP manufacturer), who would manage and maintain the PTP. Annual site compliance and maintenance checks would be arranged by the landowner(s) and carried out by the competent specialist. As part of these checks, and to ensure nitrate neutrality is maintained, effluent samples would be taken and the levels of TN recorded in a log book, which is to be kept in perpetuity by the owner of the land. The Log Book would be made available to Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council and Natural England on request.

In the event that the PTP is not achieving the required level of output, it would be the responsibility of the land owner(s) or any successors in title to fund any corrective measures and ensure they are carried out within a period of time agreed with the Council. Likewise, if the PTP has an irreparable fault, it would be the responsibility of the land owner(s) or any successors in title to replace the PTP within a period of time agreed with the Council.

Had the application been otherwise acceptable, the delivery of the PTP and its ongoing monitoring and maintenance (in accordance with the submitted Nitrate Mitigation Strategy) could have been secured by way of a pre-occupation Planning Condition. This would have provided the council, as the competent authority, with the assurance that the

mitigation (PTP) would be effective for the lifetime of the development from the point of occupation. Furthermore, the calculations provided were based on the assumption of a 110 litre per person per day water consumption. This requirement would also have been secured by way of planning condition in line with the requirements of Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. Without the security of the mitigation being provided and secured through the planning process by a planning condition, a significant effect would remain likely. Had the application been acceptable in other respects, and with a condition securing the PTP in place, the proposed development will not affect the status and distribution of key bird species and therefore act against the stated conservation objectives of the European sites. - On site biodiversity

The application is supported by an Ecological Appraisal, Dusk Emergence Survey for Bats, Biodiversity Impact Assessment and Metric and a Hedgerow Assessment. These documents demonstrate that the main ecological concerns relate to the surrounding hedgerows which are shown to provide corridors for bats and other species such as dormice. In accordance with the surmised hedgerow assessment, these hedges are to be protected and enhanced (with the exception of the section of hedgerow to be removed to facilitate the proposed access). Had all other matters been acceptable, a condition could have been imposed to ensure adherence to these details. In addition, the Ecological Appraisal specifies several mitigation measures that would ensure that impacts on a range of species would be adequately mitigated against. Adherence to these measures could also have been secured by way of condition in the event that planning permission had been recommended. The Biodiversity Impact Assessment submitted with the application demonstrates that the proposed development will achieve a biodiversity habitat net gain of 33.48% and a net gain in hedgerow units of 16.23%. In order to ensure that these measurable net gains are realised, the Biodiversity Officer recommends that a Biodiversity Management Plan is secured by way of condition and this would have been included had all other matters been acceptable. On the whole, and subject to suitable conditions, the proposal would have conserved the biodiversity value and nature conservation interests of the site and as such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the relevant guidance contained within the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

Trees Policy EM1 of the Local Plan requires that development proposals must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected, paying particular regard to b) the visual amenity and scenic quality and e) trees, ancient woodland and hedgerows. No trees are to be removed to make way for the proposed development. However, it is noted that the proposed development would be located within proximity to existing trees. Given the proximity of these trees, and their importance to the visual amenity of the site,

it is considered that a Tree Protection Plan could have been reasonably secured by way of condition ensuring that the long term health of the retained trees was not prejudiced by the construction of the development. Had the application been otherwise acceptable, this would have been secured by way of a planning condition. As such, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in adverse harm to trees of amenity value, and the proposal would accord with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan. Residential Amenity Policy EM10 requires developments to provide high levels of amenity for proposed occupants and neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light. This is supported by guidance set out within the Design and Sustainability SPD (Section 10) which establishes appropriate amounts of amenity space, privacy, natural light and outlook.

Future occupiers Design Principle RA2 set out within the Design and Sustainability SPD requires minimum garden sizes for one and two bedroomed properties to measure 50 square metres, and three bedroomed or more properties to measure 60+ square metres, whilst RA3 states that each dwelling must have a minimum garden depth of 10 metres. Key Design Principles RA5 and RA6 seek to ensure that new housing provides suitable levels of privacy. Minimum back to back distances are set out, for two storey development, this is 20m whilst three stories should provide 28m. Key Design Principle RA7 of the Design and Sustainability SPD states that new development must provide a suitable, pleasant outlook and level of natural light for both new and neighbouring dwellings. In relation to outlook and access to natural light, the positioning of openings within the proposed dwelling would result in satisfactory amenity levels for the proposed future occupiers of the dwelling. This is due to the provision of habitable room windows for adequate natural light and outlook in line with Section 10. The dwelling would also be provided with its own private external amenity space in excess of the standards set out in Principle RA2. The shape and size of private amenity space to serve the dwelling is therefore considered to be sufficient to meet recreational and domestic needs of future occupants in line with Section 10 of the SPD. The development would therefore provide high quality amenities for the future occupiers in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan.

Impact on neighbouring amenities The closest dwelling to the proposed development would be 1 Folly Farm Bungalows, located some 95m from the location of the proposed new dwelling (P1) and 2 Folly Farm Bungalows is located some 31m from site P2, where the existing office is to be demolished. Given the overall separation distances, along with the scale and siting of the new dwelling, there would no adverse overbearing or overshadowing impacts upon these neighbours' amenities. Some disturbance by virtue of construction is to be expected. As such, it would have been considered reasonable to restrict the hours of deliveries and construction by way of condition. This would have been considered necessary in order to prevent undue disturbance to neighbouring dwellings throughout the construction period and would have been included had all other matters been acceptable.

Whilst there would be an increase in residential activity at the site, it is not considered that this would be harmful to neighbouring amenities. Nor is it considered that the development would result in any other adverse impact upon any of the other neighbouring properties given the degree of separation between them and the site. The development would therefore accord with Policy EM10 and the guidance contained within the Design and Sustainability SPD in this regard. Highways and Parking Policy CN9 sets out that development should integrate into existing movement networks, provide safe, suitable and convenient access for all users; provide appropriate parking and servicing provision; and should not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safety. Policy EM10 requires developments to provide appropriate parking provision (including bicycle storage), in terms of amount, design, layout and location, in accordance with the adopted parking standards.

Trip generation The proposed development relates to the provision of 1no dwellinghouse. Officers are satisfied that the potential traffic generation from the development proposal would not have a severe detrimental impact on the operation and safety of the local highway network due to the small-scale nature of the proposal. In addition, when considering the existing office building which is to be removed, the Highways Officer considers that the proposals would result in fewer numbers of vehicular trips. The proposed development is therefore not considered to impact upon highway safety or movements.

Accessibility In addressing the proposal against the wider objectives of sustainable development of the NPPF and Policy SD1 of the Local Plan, it is noted that North Waltham provides a range of services and facilities, although these are limited. The nearest bus stop is located to within the Village centre (The Village Pond) some 1km (as the crow flies) from the application site, providing services to Basingstoke. However, it is likely that due to the overall distance, that the preferred mode of transport would be the private car. In the absence of any day to day local services and amenities, it is likely that access services and facilities would again be heavily reliant on the use of a car. However, it is noted that this in itself would not be in conflict with the NPPF whereby paragraph 105 notes that the fact that sustainable transport solutions will vary between urban and rural areas should be taken into account in decision making. Furthermore, it is noted that the site benefits from an existing extant permission for the conversion of the office building to 1no residential units. The impacts arising from this application are not considered to be materially different to those previously accepted under permitted development rights.

Access The existing drive off Waltham Lane would serve the proposed development. However, a new access off this drive is proposed to serve the new dwelling. No objections have been received from the Highways Authority in this regard. It is noted that the Highways Officer recommended conditions to secure the provision of the access and suitable sightlines, which would have been included had the application been otherwise acceptable.

It is acknowledged that the proposed access would result in the loss of vegetation that borders the existing access track serving Folly Farm. Whilst this would open up the site to views of the proposed development, these would be relatively limited to users of the existing access track. The loss of these hedgerows would therefore not have a demonstrable impact on the character and appearance of the wider countryside. Hedgerow enhancements and additional planting is also proposed to retained hedges, which would be an improvement on the existing situation.

Vehicular parking The proposed dwelling lies within a rural area as defined by the Parking SPD. Dwellings of two or three bedrooms are required to provide 2.25 spaces whilst four bedroomed dwellings are required to provide 3.25 spaces. The proposed development includes the provision of a detached double garage however it is noted that internally the garage does not meet with the required dimensions as set out within the Parking SPD. The garage therefore is not considered to contribute to the overall parking provision. Notwithstanding this, in accordance with the proposed site plan, the proposal would include a driveway area which would be of sufficient size to accommodate the required number of parking spaces as well as vehicular turning areas. On that basis, it is considered that sufficient parking space would be provided for the proposed development. Had the application been acceptable in all other respects, a condition would have been included to secure the provision and retention of the parking and turning areas.

Cycle parking/storage In accordance with the Parking SPD, 2-3 bedroom units should provide for the storage of at least 2 cycles with units comprising 4 or more bedrooms requiring storage for at least 3 cycles. No details have been provided of this provision, however had the application been acceptable in other respects, a condition securing details of this could have been included.

Summary In the event that planning permission had been recommended, the development would be acceptable in relation to highway matters and would accord with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Refuse and recycling storage and collection Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council operates a kerbside waste collection service. This is operated via wheeled containers which must be left adjacent to the nearest adopted highway for collection on the specified waste collection. The nearest adopted highway would be Waltham Lane. Occupants of the proposed development will be required to leave wheeled containers on the lane leading to Folly Farm for collection on the specified collection day and for these to be removed from the highway and returned back to the property as soon as possible following collection. In accordance with Appendix 3 of the Design and Sustainability SPD, dwellings should be provided with space for the storage of 1no. 240 litre waste bin, 1no. 240 litre recycling bin and 1no recycling container for glass.

In the absence of details on a designated collection point and storage areas, these could have been reasonably secured by way of condition had the application been acceptable in all other respects. Contaminated Land The NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing development from contributing to or being put at risk from unacceptable levels of pollution. Local Plan Policy EM12 also seeks to protect health and the natural environment from polluting effects as a result of existing, historic or nearby land uses and activities. The proposed residential use is considered to be sensitive to contaminated land. However, on this occasion, as reviewed by the Environmental Health Officer, it is considered that the likelihood of finding contaminated land from historic activity on the site be unlikely. As such, contamination reports are there not considered necessary in this instance. Had the application been otherwise acceptable the development would accord with Policy EM12 of the Local Plan. Flooding and Drainage Policy EM7 of the Local Plan requires a sequential approach be applied to account for all sources of flooding thus directing new development away from areas at highest risk or alternatively demonstrating that new development is flood resilient and resistant. This approach is consistent with guidance provided within the NPPF and requires taking advice from the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authorities to ensure that risks of flooding are adequately managed, whilst also accounting for future climate change. Policy EM7 is considered in conjunction with Policy EM6 (Water Quality) and Policy EM12 (Pollution) which seeks to ensure that new development does not pose any unacceptable risk to water quality, water courses, ground water sources or the natural environment.

Flood Risk The Environment Agency Flood Risk Maps position the site as falling within Flood Zone 1 giving the site a low risk of fluvial flooding (less than 1 in 1000 annual probability). The Government's long-term flood risk mapping shows that the majority of the site is also at a very low risk of surface water flooding. Due to the location, and with the site area sitting under 1ha in size, there has not been a requirement to accompany the application with any flood risk assessment. The application form indicates that surface water would be disposed of via soakaway, which is considered acceptable in this instance. Overall, the development would therefore accord with Policy EM7 of the Local Plan, and Section 14 of the NPPF.

Foul drainage Although as marked on the application form as unknown, in achieving nutrient neutrality, it is advised that wastewater would be treated by a Package Treatment Plant, which is to be located on the site.

The national planning guidance sets out that proposals for septic tanks or package treatment plants should only be considered if it can be clearly demonstrated by the applicant that discharging into a public sewer to be treated at a public sewage treatment works or package sewage treatment plant is not feasible (taking into account costs and or practicability). This is supported by the NPPF in paragraphs 174 and 185 regarding preserving the natural environment and preventing unacceptable risks from pollution on health, the natural environment and general amenity. In this instance, it is acknowledged that connection to a public sewer is not feasible given that the nearest public sewer is positioned approximately 622m to the west and therefore there are no objections to the installation of a PTP. In this respect, the application is considered to be in accordance with national guidance and with Policy EM6 of the Local Plan. Energy Efficiency Policy EM10 of the Local Plan sets out that development should provide buildings which are able to respond to environmental change and which minimise energy consumption through sustainable approaches to design. Policy EM9 of the Local Plan sets out a requirement to ensure that water resources within new development are used sustainably through the imposition of a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day. As no information has been submitted in this regard, it would have been considered appropriate that this requirement be dealt with by way of condition. Had the application been otherwise acceptable, this would have been included. Attention is additionally drawn to the need to address the declared Climate Emergency by way of informative. Policy EM10 b) and f) additionally require that new development incorporates and/or promotes renewable and low carbon energy technologies. In this instance, it is considered reasonable that a condition could have been imposed to secure details of how the development might incorporate Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP). Had the application been acceptable in all other respects, this would have been included. Community Infrastructure Levy Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The required forms have been submitted for CIL contributions to be calculated if applicable. From these forms, it would appear that the development would be CIL liable but would attract a nil charge in line with the Council's Charging Schedule. Planning Balance and Conclusion The principle of the erection of single dwellings in the countryside is allowed for within the development plan. However, in this instance the application does not accord with the detailed criteria contained therein, as set out in details above. Whilst the principle of development does not comply with the policies contained within the development plan, as set out above, the council cannot currently demonstrate a deliverable five year supply of housing (with 5% buffer required due to the Housing Delivery Test results). Policy SS6 is therefore out of date as it relates to the supply of housing. The application must therefore be considered in accordance with paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF which states that where relevant policies are considered out of date

permission will be granted unless the application of policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed, or any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole. The application site is located the catchment of the River Test which ultimately drains to the internationally designated Solent Water Special Protection Area and Special Areas of Conservation. The potential significant effects on this designated area however can be satisfactorily mitigated. Under Paragraph 11(d)(ii) of the NPPF, it states that permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF identifies that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality or rural communities, and paragraph 79 advises that local planning authorities should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside. Given the location of the site within an area considered to be isolated and unsustainable, it is considered that the proposal would result in an isolated form of development and would therefore be contrary to paragraphs 78 and 79 of the NPPF. However it is acknowledged that site P2 benefits from extant permission for its conversion to a residential unit which forms a material planning consideration in the determination of this application. It is acknowledged that the proposal would make a modest contribution to the Council's 5-year housing land supply. However, this contribution would be limited given a net increase of only one dwelling and therefore is afforded limited weight in the overall balance. There would also be a limited economic benefit resulting from the construction of the new property and its subsequent occupation. These benefits are not considered to outweigh the harm identified by virtue of the isolated siting of the development in combination with the scale of the development, including the associated hardstanding, boundary treatments and domestic paraphernalia, within open and undeveloped countryside, resulting in an urbanising impact to the detriment of the character and appearance of this rural landscape. Furthermore, the proposed development is considered to be unrelated to surrounding development, would not contribute to local distinctiveness and is considered poor design by virtue of scale and massing in this location. The proposed development would therefore not meet the social and environmental objectives in achieving sustainable development in this regard. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. The harm identified above is not considered to outweigh the conflict found with the currently out of date planning Policy SS6, nor the harm identified to the landscape character and the resulting conflict with Local Plan Policy EM1. The development would therefore not meet the relevant sections of the NPPF whereby demonstrable harm would be presented by the development that would outweigh the benefits assessed above. The proposed development therefore does not accord with the NPPF when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

Informative(s):- 1. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

- proactively offering a pre-application advice (in accordance with paragraphs

39 - 46); - seeking further information following receipt of the application; - seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the

application; - considering the imposition of conditions and or the completion of a s.106 legal

agreement (in accordance with paragraphs 55-58).

In this instance:

- the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

Location plan

Proposed Block Plan

Proposed Site Layout

Proposed Elevations

Proposed Garage Plans

Proposed Floor Plans

Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 3

Application no: 20/03488/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Hollington House, Rose Cottage Woolton Hill Newbury

Proposal Erection of a treehouse, 3 no. outbuildings, 2 no. undercover shelters, tent platform with decking area and seated shelter to existing glampsite (part retrospective)

Registered: 18 January 2021 Expiry Date: 20 May 2021

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Bethan Wallington 01256 845361

Applicant: Ms Claire Lennon Agent:

Ward: Evingar Ward Member(s): Cllr Samuel Carr Cllr Graham Falconer Cllr John Izett

Parish: EAST WOODHAY CP

OS Grid Reference: 442555 161139

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposed development comprises a small scale form of rural tourism utilising

existing space within an established site and would be of an appropriate design and siting, would relate to surrounding development and would not result in significant impacts on the local landscape character, scenic quality of the area or wider North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Beauty. As such the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies EP4, EP5, EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

2. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety and

adequate parking would be provided to serve the development. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

4. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on biodiversity

and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

5. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on trees and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

General Comments The application is brought before the Development Control Committee in line with the Scheme of Delegation due to the number of objections received and the Officers recommendation for approval. Planning Policy The site is located outside of any Settlement Boundary Policy and therefore lies within the open countryside. The site also lies within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 4 (Decision-making) Section 6 (Building a strong, competitive economy) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) POlicy EM12 (Pollution) POlicy EM4 (Rural Economy) Policy EP5 (Rural Tourism) Policy CN9 (Transport) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Parking Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (March 2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan 2019-2024

Description of Site The application site primarily comprises a broadly triangular area of land to the south of an area of woodland, adjacent to the east is a detached dwelling, Rose Cottage. The site comprises a clearing within the woodland where structures have been sited on the land following the change of use of the land to a glamping site. The immediate area is rural in character and sparsely populated. A vehicular access and parking areas for Rose Cottage have been used for the purposes of the business operation. Proposal The proposal seeks planning permission for the erection of a treehouse, 3 no. sheds (already on site), 2no. undercover shelters, a tent platform with decking area (already on site) and seated shelters as further development upon land that benefits from planning permission for a glamping site. The tree house would provide additional glamping accommodation at the premises and would measure 6m in width, 3.5m in depth and 4.4m in height. The tree house would be raised above ground by 2.9m in height and would provide stairs to access the accommodation. The three sheds measure 2.4m in width, 1.8m in depth and 2.4m in height and the two undercover shelters measure 1.7m by 1.7m and 2.2m in height. The tent platform with decking measures 8.4m in depth (maximum) by 6m in width with the seated shelter measuring a maximum of 3.8m by 2.7m and 2.6m in height. Amendments Additional information has been submitted to the application comprising a tree survey, details of a woodland management scheme, and a preliminary ecological assessment. Consultations East Woodhay Parish Council "The Planning Committee of East Woodhay Parish Council object to any expansion of visitor accommodation on this site and so continue to object to the above application. However, should it be granted the Committee would ask for certain conditions to be associated with it, as explained below. a) The original Planning permission of 2016 granted retrospective permission in relation to a one-acre site which forms part of a wood of approximately 10 acres. The site plan accompanying the current application continues to show the proposed tree house abutting the boundary of the existing one-acre site. Any planning permission which may be granted should therefore be conditional upon the applicants being prevented from encroaching beyond the area of the existing one-acre site area. b) The current application refers to seeking planning permission for a tree house "within our 9.98 acres total of land named Hollington Park." However, there is no permission to use 9.98 acres for 'glamping purposes', only 1 acre. If the applicants wish to extend the area of the glamping site within the wood they should apply for permission to do so in the proper manner - though to be clear, this would not be supported by the Planning Committee. It would be unacceptable if the applicants sought to extend the existing site by unauthorised piecemeal incursions into the adjoining area; and it should be made very clear that any further retrospective applications would only serve to unnecessarily

alienate local residents and the Planning Committee, rather than to gain support. c) In 2016 when retrospective permission was sought for the 2 pods, the Planning Committee asked that the enterprise be restricted to a maximum of 2 pods. In response, the officer's report advised that such a condition was not necessary because, "the planning application is for description specified and must be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans. Any intensification by way of additional pods or other structures would require separate planning permission". This application does not seek planning permission for the tents because, as explained in the Design and Access Statement: "We have not sought planning permission for these as advised by our planning consultant as they are situated within the curtilage of land that has change of use to glampsite…". The consequence is that the applicants have planning permission for two pods, and believe they can have further visitors in tents (if their planning consultant is correct, they could provide any number of tents) and now they are asking for permission for the treehouse. The Planning Committee consider that the applicants' interpretation of the 2016 permission is incorrect and the proper interpretation of that permission is as follows: the number of units of accommodation is limited to two pods and that the reference in the permission to change of use to glamping, authorises the land within the 1 acre application site to be used for glamping purposes ancillary to the two pods. It does not authorise additional visitor accommodation. If the applicants' interpretation of the permission is correct, any number of tents could be erected, enabling any number of visitors to be accommodated, which cannot have been intended. Consequently, the current retrospective application (which is intended to regularise the current situation as well as authorise the treehouse) is incomplete and incorrect. If the applicants wish to provide accommodation in tents, the application should be amended to make that clear and the decision on the application should address the issues raised, with appropriate conditions. d) The Committee is surprised by the comments made by BDBC Landscape Team that "the site does not have any close neighbours". This is entirely incorrect - the neighbours cannot be seen through the rest of the woodland, but they exist. Approaches have been made to the Planning Committee by neighbouring residents who find the music and other noise emanating from the site (especially in the evenings) extremely intrusive. An increase in visitor numbers would inevitably lead to more noise, which in a rural, residential area is already at an unacceptable level. e) It is noted that the Design and Access Statement states that "all the tree work is up to date and regularly monitored." The applicants have stated in the past that the glamping business was set up to bring in revenue to help manage the woodland. There is no evidence of any such management as the woodland appears to be in a very poor state, with trees regularly shedding branches in windy weather. Indeed, a tree was felled last year under direction of the Hampshire Tree Officer and this has been left lying on the ground, within the wood. A tree survey seems to have been undertaken on the area of the glamping site but this fails to address the safety of the area beyond the site, where visitors to the glamping site may be at risk, should they inadvertently roam there. Whilst that is a matter for the applicants, the safety of trees along the highway is a matter which the Committee has raised with Hampshire Highways, as clearly public safety cannot be compromised. There

are a number of horse chestnut trees (and others) along the highway (Church Road) which regularly drop branches in poor weather and would benefit from some attention from a professional tree surgeon. f) Of further concern is the size and scale of this proposal. When retrospective planning permission was granted in 2016 for two "pods", a toilet and a shower block on a one-acre site, the enterprise was presented as small and low key. Indeed, this is not an appropriate site for anything larger or more commercial. Yet the applicants' latest Design and Access Statement says: "......an increase in units will allow us" (emphasis added) - the use of the plural is concerning. This application is for only one new unit and to formalise other units (shower sheds) which have been placed on the site without planning permission. The applicants also state: "therefore protecting the woodland from further development." Indeed, the Committee is in agreement on that point - any planning permission granted this time round should make it perfectly clear that there will be no further expansion of the site and to try to get things through retrospectively will not be acceptable. g) The Committee is also concerned that the previous application sought permission for an additional parking area, and it appears the applicants have already cleared an area for this purpose. Accordingly, any planning permission which may be granted in relation to the current application should be conditional on the applicants being prevented from adding another parking area to the site, whether now or retrospectively. In summary, the Planning Committee is extremely concerned at the continuing piecemeal approach to this development which does not encourage a supportive and open discussion. As has been said before, to present local residents and the planning authority with a "done deal" in the hope that this means it is more likely to be granted is an unacceptable way forward, and engenders no goodwill. Further, the Committee do not feel that the site should be extended beyond the two pods which were granted in 2016. That said there is no objection to the two sheds adjacent to the two pods (marked blue on the plan) which provide showers for the pods. The Committee suggest that for clarity, the addition of the two bell tents be regularised as explained in c) above, and noting no further tents to be added on this site. However, the Committee do not support the application for a tree house and further expansion of this site. Should permission be granted, the Committee expressly request that the permission granted makes it very clear the number of pods, tents and other structures allowed and that the following conditions are added: - That there will be no further expansion to the site, either by seeking to extend the glamping site beyond the existing one-acre site or by seeking to install more pods, tents, treehouses or other structures. - There will be no additional driveways, access ways or parking places created - all access to the site to be via the existing driveway at Rose Cottage, where the applicants have already confirmed there is ample parking.

- That there is no loud music within the site. Please advise the Parish Clerk should the matter be referred to the Development Control Committee as the Parish Council may wish to appoint a Councillor to attend." Landscape Officer: No objection. Biodiversity Officer: Initial Comments: Ecological Survey required.

Final Comments: No objection subject to condition. Tree Officer: No objections to previous application. Public Observations Three letters of objection were received concerning the following (in summary):

Concerns with the expansion of the facility as the original application only granted permission for two pods as visitor accommodation.

The accompanying plan shows the location of 2 tents with notations that they are within the scope of the 2016 permission. For this reason, although the applicants acknowledge that they do erect tents, the current retrospective planning application does not seek permission for the provision of additional accommodation in the form of tents.

The applicants' Design and Access Statement asserts that there are no residences in the immediate area however there are a number of dwellings in the vicinity which are impacted by the development in respect of noise and disturbance.

The trees and hedges provide some visual screening but do not prevent noise including music from being heard from outside the application site.

The applicants are incrementally increasing the site from a low key development to an increased visitor capacity.

The development would lead to loss of peacefulness and natural amenity to an agricultural area.

The negative impact on the village and overdevelopment of the site. Four letters of support were received concerning the following (in summary):

The glamping site has a positive impact and attracts more customers to local businesses in Woolton Hill.

With the exit of COVID-19 every bit of support of businesses in needed from other businesses.

The site is in a lovely positon with plenty of space and privacy from neighbours. Relevant Planning History

16/00119/RET Change of use of woodland to glampsite.

Erection of 2 no. glamping pods,

composting toilet, shower room and fire

pit (retrospective).

Granted 16.06.2016

18/03332/HSE Erection of single storey extension and

alterations to roof to create new living

space and front porch to the east.

Granted 19.07.2019

20/01274/FUL Erection of tree house to an existing

glampsite.

Withdrawn 29.10.2020

Assessment Planning History Retrospective planning permission was granted on 16th June 2016 (planning reference 16/00119/RET) for the change of use of woodland to a glamping site and for the retention of the structures on the site at that time which comprised two glamping pods, a composting toilet, shower room and a fire pit. The pods and washroom facilities approved within that application are temporary in nature in that they have been positioned on wooden 'skids' which are not fixed to the ground. Concerns were previously raised by residents that the site only be allowed for two pods. Whilst permission was granted for two pods, no restrictions were imposed to prevent the addition of tents as temporary structures on the site in relation to the glamping use of the land. In addition, applicants are able to apply for planning permission to increase the permanent structures at the site which is the subject of this current submission. The proposed development does not increase the size of the site. A subsequent application (reference 20/01274/FUL) sought planning permission for the tree house. This application was however withdrawn to enable a comprehensive application to be made to consider the tree house alongside other structures erected on the site. Principle of development The NPPF supports planning decisions that enable the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of businesses in rural areas, which includes the provision of rural tourism. Policy EP4 of the Local Plan is aligned with the NPPF and states that to support the rural economy, development proposals for economic uses in the countryside will be permitted where they meet one of a of number criteria. In this regard, the development would fall under criteria (d) of Policy EP4 in that the works would ‘enable the continuing sustainability or expansion of a business or enterprise’. The principle of the development is therefore deemed acceptable against Policy EP4 however this is also subject to meeting further criteria which consider matters such as the physical impacts of the development, accessibility of the site, and the need for a permanent unit of residential accommodation (of which no permanent residential accommodation is being sought here). These elements are to be assessed below, as well as being assessed against the other relevant policies within the Local Plan. Policy EP5 of the Local Plan is particularly relevant and specifically addresses tourism development including guest accommodation. Policy EP5 states that camping sites are key components of the borough's tourism accommodation offer and that the council will support proposals where these form an extension to an existing facility and is of a scale appropriate to the location and appropriate to the impacts on the local highway network. In principle, the proposed development would add additional guest accommodation (the

tree house) along with works to facilitate the use of tents to an existing site, with the remaining structures supporting the extant permitted use. Again Policy EP5 is also subject to criteria addressing the impact of the development having regard to the character and visual quality of the area, ensuring that any visual intrusion can be mitigated. It is considered that the principle of the proposed development meets the criteria set out within the above referenced Policies of the Local Plan and is therefore acceptable subject to other material planning considerations being considered. These will be set out within the below assessment. Impact on the character of the area/design Policy EM1 states that development will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area concerned and must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected. Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) seeks high quality development across the borough, based upon a robust design-led process and a clear understanding of the local identity and context of development to create successful, inviting places where people want to live, work and enjoy themselves. The application site is set within the North Wessex Downs AONB and on the edge of Woolton Hill. The site is set within woodland that is part of an existing glamping site. To the south and west of the proposed site is the access road to Hollington House and Public Right of Way East Woodhay No.32 along with a selection of scattered properties. Most residential properties are situated along Church Road looking east onto the woodland but due to the density of vegetation, the site is not visible from the highway. To the east of the site is open fields and scattered properties and to the north is woodland. The area has a mixed character of residential and agricultural uses along with the glamping site. The application is for the erection of a treehouse, 3 no. outbuildings, 2 no. undercover shelters, a tent platform with decking area and a seated shelter to serve the existing glampsite (part retrospective). To address concerns of the Parish Council, no extension to the site area used for the glampsite is being sought with the additional unit of guest accommodation and the ancillary structures positioned wholly within the approved site. The proposed development would have a minimal impact upon the character and appearance of the site as the proposed site is largely obscured from public view due to the wooded and enclosed nature. The Landscape Officer has confirmed that, although there are properties within the edge of village vicinity, the site itself is not overlooked by other properties or is visible from the Public Right of Way. The location of the proposed tree house and other facilities nestled amongst the woodland would not be visible within the wider landscape setting and would therefore not have a visual impact on the landscape or affect the landscape character of the area. The Landscape Officer has therefore raised no objection or adverse comments to the landscape or visual impacts of the proposal. There would be no adverse or harmful impacts on landscape quality or visual amenity of the AONB as a result of the proposed development. The proposal would result in additional built form on the site however would not result in overdevelopment given their modest size. It is considered that the proposed structures would have a rural nature, sympathetic design and appropriate use of materials being

timber to reflect the woodland setting. As such, it is considered the development is acceptable in design terms and would have no adverse impact on the landscape character of the designated AONB in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Impact on neighbouring amenities Policy EM10 requires developments to also retain high levels of amenity for neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light. Policy EM12 establishes that development will only be permitted where it does not result in pollution which is detrimental to quality of life or poses unacceptable risk to health or the natural environment. The site is located within a low density area in terms of residential properties and there are significant separation distances between residential properties. The closest neighbouring properties are Rose Cottage (which operates the glamping site) that sits to the west and Hollington House to the south west, 70m from the site. Rookery Farmhouse is located 105m to the north east of the site and The Slait House is 155m from the site. The position of the tree house and the ancillary structures are adequately located away from any neighbouring properties and are screened by woodland to avoid any impacts in regards to privacy, overshadowing, loss of light or being overbearing. However objections have been raised regarding noise and odour generation from the existing use of the site with a request also made by the Parish Council to condition the use of music. It would not be reasonable to impose such a condition in relation to this application when it was not deemed necessary to do so when the change of use of the land was granted. As such, extant issues of noise and odour pursuant to the permitted use, if forming a statutory nuisance, would be a matter for address by Environmental Health. In considering the development sought within this current application, it is accepted that the tree house would add further visitors, however it is not considered that the addition of the tree house, shelters, outbuildings and a platform for a tent (which could be erected in any event) would generate a level of demonstrable impact over and above the existing activities that could justify a refusal on amenity grounds. As such, the development is considered acceptable in regards to neighbouring amenity in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Local Plan. Highways and Parking Policy CN9 sets out that development should provide appropriate on-site parking and should not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safety. The site is accessed via an unadopted highway and is currently used in connection with the existing glamping site and residential property (Rose Cottage). The determination of the application under 16/00119/RET for the extant use considered highway matters to include traffic generation, access and egress from the site and parking which were deemed acceptable as to enable a permission to be granted. The glamping operation is aimed at appealing to tourists wishing to visit the region. Travel to the site and from nearby attractions and back would be largely reliant on cars.

The extant use accommodates the vehicular requirements on site within the curtilage of Rose Cottage with sufficient space available to meet the requirements of the further permanently fixed unit of guest accommodation (i.e. the tree house). There is space for turning to enable access and exit in a forward gear therefore the existing arrangements are considered acceptable. The site plan does show parking space available within the site consistent with the parking area approved within the 2016 application. The addition of one fixed unit is also not considered to give rise to unacceptable levels of vehicular movements or result in harm in respect of highway safety. Whilst there is also an expectation that further movements could be generated by the use of tents on site, as indicated above, this could already occur at any time under the extant permission for the use of the land. There is a public footpath (East Woodhay 32) which runs from Front Lodge to the north-west along the southern boundary of the site along the unadopted vehicular road to the east onto a track through fields. The Hampshire County Council Rights of Way Officer requested a number of conditions be imposed on the previous application with regards to vehicles crossing the footpath. Given the existing situation of the vehicular access serving Rose Cottage crossing the footpath and the extent of the footpath along the unadopted road, it is considered that an informative in respect of the right of way for vehicles crossing the footpath is sufficient to be repeated on this application. As such, the development is considered in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Local Plan in respect of highway safety and parking arrangements. Natural Environment

Biodiversity The Local Planning Authority has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have full regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity which extends to being mindful of the legislation that considers protected species and their habitats and to the impact of the development upon sites designated for their ecological interest. These requirements are also reflected within the NPPF (paragraph 180) and Policy EM4 of the Local Plan which establishes that proposals will only be permitted where significant harm to biodiversity can be avoided or adequately mitigated unless there is a demonstrated overriding public need. The application has been accompanied by an accompanying Ecological Survey to ensure that the additional built form would not result in the loss or deterioration of a key habitat type in line with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. The Ecological Survey sets out a number of recommendations in order to protect species such as bats, birds and other terrestrial mammals. The Biodiversity Officer has reviewed this report and considered the contents acceptable providing that these recommendations are conditioned (see condition 3) on the approval with such a condition being considered reasonable and necessary. As such, the proposal is considered in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan.

Trees Policy EM1 of the Local Plan requires that development proposals must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected, paying particular regard to b) the visual amenity and scenic quality and e) trees, ancient woodland and hedgerows. The site is located within Hollington Park which a woodland.

The proposal includes works in close proximity to important trees on the site with the tree house to be erected around a mature oak tree. The submitted tree report outlines adequate measures to ensure that trees are safeguarded, such as through use of minimal invasive techniques to secure the tree house and tree protection fencing to be installed. The Tree Officer raised no objections to the development providing that conditions are imposed to ensure that tree protection measures are adhered to along with arboricultural monitoring and verification (see conditions 5 and 6). With these conditions in place, the development is considered to be in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan. Concerns have been raised by the Parish Council as to the management of the woodland and management of trees along the highway. In response, it is also noted that the Woodland Management Plan secured through the permission granted under 16/0119/RET (condition 2) has been resubmitted. This Plan sets out management of the trees across a 5-10 year period as of 2016 and, given that it is already secured under the previous permission, the plan remains relevant to the management of the site. Finally, Part e) of the Parish Council comments consider that trees beyond the site are at risk however as the Parish Council correctly identify, this is a matter outside the control of the planning application and applies to other land which the land owner is responsible for. Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The required forms have been submitted for CIL contributions to be calculated if applicable. From these forms, it would appear that the development would be Cil liable, but would attract a £nil charge in line with the Council's Charging Schedule. Other matters A number of other comments were made by East Woodhay Parish Council in response to the application which will be addressed below.

Extension of glamping site

Points a) and b) of the Parish Council comments request conditions to prevent further expansion of the land and that the application indicates there are 9.98 acres at Hollington Park, not the 1 acre agreed for glamping purposes. The application site shows the development to be contained within the glamping site as approved within planning permission 16/00119/RET. Any additional change of use of the adjacent woodland in the applicant’s ownership would require a planning application to be submitted for consideration therefore a condition of this manner would not meet the tests set out within the NPPF.

Provision of tents Point c) of the Parish Council comments relate to the erection of tents at the site to provide additional tourist accommodation. It is correct that two tents are shown on the submitted plan to this current application and that the tent platform would facilitate this use. Whilst this site plan suggests that tents formed part of the previous permission, this is incorrect with no tents previously illustrated under the permission granted by 16/00119/RET nor referred to within the supporting information.

Notwithstanding this, the site has permission for glamping (i.e. luxury camping). This permission whilst also granting the provision of two permanently fixed pods did not restrict the remaining site from being used for temporary structures that equally provide a glamping experience, such as tents. Any number of tents could therefore be erected at the site under the approved use which remains extant under the 2016 planning permission. It would therefore be unreasonable to now impose a restriction upon the presence of tents at the site through this current application that seeks permission for other forms of operational development.

Retrospective planning permission Part f) of the Parish Council raises concern to the retrospective nature of the development and the subsequent additions to the site. It is not an offence to undertake operational development and to seek permission retrospectively. The works carried out without the benefit of permission are therefore done so at the applicant’s own risk. An application remains to be determined based on the information presented, irrespective of whether the works are already in place or not. Conclusion In concluding the proposed development, it is considered that the principle of the development would be acceptable in regards to Policies EP4 and EP5 of the Local Plan. The development relates to intensifying the activities on the existing where a need for the facility was considered acceptable under planning permission 16/00119/RET. In considering the additional structures on site, these are considered to relate sympathetically to the character and visual quality of the area whereby it has been established in the assessment above that the development would be nestled within the woodland with no objections raised from the Landscape Officer. The development therefore would accord in principle to the Local Plan and also have no overriding demonstrable harm to the landscape character, residential amenity, the natural environment or highway safety. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans: Location Plan Site Layout Plan Tent Area with Seated Shelter and Decking Shed and Shelters Tree House Elevations 1 of 2 Tree House Elevations 2 of 2 Tree House Floor Plan Tree House Roof Plan

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture to those on the application form and approved plans. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3 The proposed development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations contained with the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by Arbtech dated 13th April 2021. REASON: To ensure that the development limits impacts on existing wildlife and habitats present on site and enhancements to improve the site for wildlife in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 Protective measures, including fencing, ground protection, supervision, working

procedures and special engineering solutions shall be carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural Impact Assessment produced by SJ Stephens Associates (dated 7th January 2021). REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

5 No development shall occur on site until such time as a programme Arboricultural

monitoring and reporting of building works in proximity to trees has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved programme of management shall include the contact details for a qualified arboriculturist whose responsibility will be to implement the programme by overseeing any excavations within the RPA of retained trees. REASON: To ensure appropriate mitigation is in place to safeguard tree of amenity value that are to be retained in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

6 Prior to the first use of the tree house, a verification report shall be submitted to

and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall summarise the findings of the arboricultural supervision and monitoring. The verification report shall also highlight any follow up actions or assessments required, including any mitigation or compensation measures that may result. This shall include timeframes for any such mitigation or compensation measures. REASON: To ensure appropriate mitigation or compensation measures are carried out following the completion of development to safeguard trees in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a

condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

- seeking further information following receipt of the application; - considering the imposition of conditions (in accordance with paragraphs 55-

58).

In this instance:

- the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Hampshire County Council Rights of Way Officer has requested that the

applicant be made aware of the following;

Under Section 34 of the Road Traffic Act (1988) it is an offence to drive over a public footpath, bridleway or restricted byway without lawful authority and the applicant should therefore satisfy themselves that they have this authority (either by owning the land over which the right of way runs, or alternatively having been granted permission by the landowner), and also that such authority would extend to the glamping pod visitors.

All vehicles visiting the site would be crossing the public footpath must have an awareness of the need to give way to footpath users.

Hampshire County Council, as Highway Authority, is not obliged to provide a surface suitable for the passage of vehicles over the footpath.

There must be no surface alterations to the right of way, nor should any work be carried out which affect its surface, without prior permission of Hampshire County Council, as Highway Authority.

Nothing connected with the development or its future use should have an adverse effect on the right of way, which must remain available for safe public use at all times.

4. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any

conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

Location plan

Block Plan

Proposed Site Plan

Proposed Tree House Elevations

Proposed Tree House Plans

Proposed Tent/Decking Areas and Seated Shelters

Proposed Sheds

Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 4

Application no: 21/00337/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Herriard Nursery Barn Scratchface Lane Herriard Basingstoke

Proposal Erection of extension to existing cheese production premises with revised access.

Registered: 5 February 2021 Expiry Date: 10 September 2021

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Meredith Baker 01256 845444

Applicant: Hampshire Cheese Company

Agent: Mr G Williams

Ward: Basing & Upton Grey

Ward Member(s): Cllr Onnalee Cubitt Cllr Sven Godesen Cllr Mark Ruffell

Parish: HERRIARD CP OS Grid Reference: 466241 145862

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval

1. The proposed development would support the rural economy in an appropriate location by enabling the expansion of an existing business for economic use in the countryside. The development would not give rise to unacceptable impacts upon landscape, heritage or the natural environment and is well related to the strategic road network and easily accessible to HGVs, in accordance with Policies EP1 and EP4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021).

2. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design and relate to

surrounding development and the rural area in a sympathetic manner and as such complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 - 2029 and guidance contained within the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

3. The proposed development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing, noise or light pollution or disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. The development, subject to appropriate conditions, would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety with adequate parking and turning provided to serve the development and as such the proposal complies with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

General comments The application is brought before the Development Control Committee in line with the Scheme of Delegation due to the number of objections received and the Officer’s recommendation for approval. Planning Policy The site is located outside of any recognised Settlement Policy Boundary and is therefore within the countryside. The access would be made onto the Public Right of Way by-way (Route number 115/5/1). National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 2 (Achieving sustainable development) Section 4 (Decision-making) Section 6 (Building a strong, competitive economy) Section 9 (Promoting sustainable transport) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (This Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Policy EP1 (Economic Growth and Investment) Policy EP4 (Rural Economy) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Parking Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (March 2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Description of Site The site is accessed from Scratchface Lane, a Public Right of Way by-way (Route number 115/5/1) which adjoins the A339 at Herriard Nursery Barn. The site is located within a group of diversified farm buildings and contains an existing single storey commercial building (of olive-green vertical cladding walls and grey profile sheeting roofing) within a Class B2 use for cheese production. To the south of the building sits a large area of hardstanding. The immediate locality is mixed in its use with commercial and residential properties visible in the street scene.

Proposal The proposal seeks planning permission for the erection of an extension to the existing building and a revised access point onto Scratchface Lane. The proposed extension would project 12 metres in depth from the existing front elevation and would lie flush in width. The ridge and eaves height are proposed to match the existing building in a dual pitched roof form. The proposed materials to the front, rear and side (south eastern) elevations are to match the existing building. With regard to the north western elevation it is proposed that this elevation (the existing and proposed wall) would be cladded in light brown stained horizontal cladding. With regard to the new access point, this would be located further south than the existing situation and would have 2.4x 43m visibility sightlines. It is proposed that trees/shrubs and hedging would be planted to form the new boundary treatment, stopping up the existing access point. Finally it is proposed that new hardstanding would be placed on site. The new access would have a tarmac apron connecting the site to the highway and within the site the new hardstanding (which would extend upon the existing area of grass to the south) would be permeable hardstanding to match the existing hardstanding used on site. Consultations Herriard Parish Council: “Please note that two of our Parish Councillors are conflicted on this matter, one as a near neighbour to the application site and the other as landlord to the applicant. The following comments represent the considered view of the remaining 3 Councillors. Hampshire Cheese Company is a shining example of a rural business that has created “best in the world” status for its products. Our village is proud to have them based here and Herriard Parish Council fully supports the applicants' stated aim to improve the efficiency of their cheese production facility and allow for future growth of their business. The Company’s premises are located within Herriard Estate just off the A339 on Scratchface Lane, which is a narrow unclassified road. Other premises on Scratchface Lane support a variety of rural/agricultural activities. There are also a number of offices and private residences, which have been converted from original farm buildings. Some of the private residences are within 50m of the proposed development and face it directly. The volume of traffic using Scratchface Lane has increased over the years and the growth in non-agricultural movements has led to complaints from residents. Particular issues have arisen from vehicles delivering and collecting from Hampshire Cheese Company outside normal business operating hours. It is testament to the mutually considerate relationship between the company and residents that these problems have been discussed and mitigation measures agreed. The same accommodation has been possible for some aspects of the current planning application in terms of over-looking and screening. The applicant also makes the point that the new extension will increase storage space and should therefore lead to a helpful reduction in the frequency of some goods-in supplies e.g. packaging materials.

However, the residents do remain understandably concerned about future traffic volumes and possible increases in the size of vehicles serving the facility. So, while Herriard Parish Council supports the principle of this application, we would urge that a suitable traffic management plan be required as a condition of approval. An agreed set of rules will give both the applicant and local residents clarity and certainty about future operations and provide a basis on which the existing positive relationship can be maintained.” Local Highway Authority: Initial (and secondary) comments – Holding objection until further information has been provided.

Final comments – No objection subject to conditions. Hampshire County Council Archaeology: No objection. Environmental Health: No objection subject to condition. Public Observations Five letters of objection were received raising the following concerns (in summary):

Request that the condition under reference BDB/74164 is reimposed where the use is restricted to cheese production only.

Not expecting condition 7 of BDB/74164 (restriction of poly-tunnel area on site) to be varied under this application.

Concern over increased traffic movements as a result of the proposal.

Vehicles in particular HGVs can result in adverse noise and light pollution to neighbouring properties, in particular in unsociable hours.

Conservations with building owner that it is unusual to receive HGV deliveries before 08:00 or for the site to be working after 17:00 and thus request that a 08:00 to 17:00 hours of delivery/working condition is imposed.

No restriction on hours imposed previously, however the current proposal would increase production on site and therefore a restriction can be appropriate now.

Development is located off an unclassified road. Concern that contrary to Policy EP4 of the Local Plan as this would increase use of HGVs on C and U class roads.

Whilst Scratchface Lane is sufficient to accommodate farm vehicles and HGVs, it is a single lane road and is in use with residential occupants of nearby dwellings.

In interest of adverse light pollution request for conditions prohibiting lighting on north west elevation and no new windows to be inserted on this elevation.

Request for restriction of HGV movements that would access the site.

Landscaping should be maintained at 2.5m to screen the factory.

A condition should be imposed to ensure all vehicles can enter and exit the site in a forward gear.

The representations, whilst objecting to the development included supporting comments raising the following (in summary):

Timber cladding would make the building more aesthetically pleasing in the street scene.

Extension of hedging would break up views of the building which is welcomed.

Support development of the rural economy in line with Policy EP4 of the Local Plan.

Relevant Planning History

15/00482/FUL Creation of reed bed to clean waste

washing water

Granted 08.06.2015

18/01316/FUL Erection of an extension to existing cheese

production building

Granted 04.07.2018

Assessment Principle of development Policy EP4 of the Local Plan sets out that development proposals for economic uses in the countryside will be permitted to support the rural economy if they meet one of the criteria a) to i). The proposed extension would be increasing the footprint and facilities at the existing cheese protection business. As such, it is considered that the proposal would fall under criteria (d) of Policy EP4 in that the works would ‘enable the continuing sustainability or expansion of a business or enterprise’. The principle of the development with an extension to the existing unit is therefore deemed acceptable however this is also subject to meeting the criteria of f) to i) within Policy EP4 whereby proposals must be well designed and of a use and scale that is appropriate to the site and location when considering:

f) landscape, heritage and environmental impacts; g) the accessibility of the site;

h) the impacts on the local highway network including the type of traffic generated, the appropriateness for the rural roads and the impacts on their character; and i) the need for residential accommodation on site.

Development would also not generally be considered acceptable under Policy EP4 if it would result in an increase in HGVs on C and U class roads, or a significant increase in other traffic on C and U class roads. These elements are to be assessed below, as well as being assessed against the other relevant policies within the Local Plan. Impact on the character of the area/design Policy EM1 states that development will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area concerned and must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected. Policy EM10 states that proposals will be required to respect the local environment, contribute to the streetscene, and be visually attractive. The existing site is in a commercial use and the proposed development would significantly alter the appearance of the site from the public realm, notably the public right of way which runs along the western boundary of the site. The existing building is relatively modest in scale and is of appropriate commercial/agricultural appearance which is in keeping with the locality. Scratchface Lane is mixed in its character with residential dwellings and commercial buildings.

The proposed development would be doubling the scale of the existing building to a resultant 24m in depth. This is considered a significant change to the site, however given the mixed nature of the area, and noting that the building would be retained at single storey level, the extension would not give rise to any unacceptable harm towards the character of the area or street scene. The tank to the front of the existing building would be located to the eastern side as part of the proposal to ‘de clutter’ the front of the site as visible from the public realm, which is considered an improvement to the existing situation. Additional mass would be viewed from the public highway given the nature of the immediate locality, with built forms to the north, south and west. Noting that the building is set back from the highway with some proposed soft landscaping to the boundary, the proposal would respect the sense of place and would not be detrimental to the sense of tranquillity or remoteness and quiet enjoyment of the landscape from the public right of way in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan. The extension would be in keeping with the design of the existing building and would retain the commercial appearance. The proposed materials to the front, rear and side (south eastern) elevation would match the existing building which is acceptable. It is noted that, as part of the proposal, the north western elevation would be clad with light brown stained horizontal cladding. Whilst to some element this would remove the commercial appearance of the building, it is considered that this timber cladding would soften the appearance of the built form from the street scene, in particular in the rural location. The timber cladding is therefore considered as a positive contribution which would respect the sense of place and the existing street scene. With regard to the new access, this is not considered to give rise to any unacceptable impacts upon the character of the area or street scene, noting that it is being moved further south. It is proposed that the existing access be stopped up with trees/shrubs and hedging using native species to closely match the existing mix of hedging along the boundary. This is considered acceptable and thus it is recommended that the condition requiring the access to the stopped up includes the boundary hedgerow to be planted in the first planting season following the stopping up and must match the existing mix of hedgerow on site (see condition 11). Finally, it is noted that the proposal would result in an extension of the existing hardstanding on site to form the new vehicular parking area. The area to the south west of the site is currently laid to grass, albeit is not maintained in a separate way as demonstrated on the site visit and has been used for some vehicular parking/movements. It is considered that the loss of the soft landscaping area is undesirable and the whole site would now have hardstanding. Although this is noted, given that the hardstanding is constrained within the existing unit and that the boundary treatment would screen some of the hardstanding from the public realm, this is not considered to be of demonstrable harm as to justify the recommendation of refusal for the application. This is also noting that the hardstanding is required for parking and turning as well as to support the rural enterprise (which is desired under Policy EP4 of the Local Plan). The proposed development is therefore considered not to give rise to any unacceptable impacts upon the character of the area or street scene and would accord with Policies EM1, EM10 and EP4 (criterion f) of the Local Plan.

Impact on neighbouring amenities Policy EM10 states that proposals will be required to respect the local environment, contribute to the streetscene, be visually attractive and provide adequate vehicular parking and cycle storage. Policy EM10 also requires developments to provide high levels of amenity for proposed occupants and neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light. Policy EM12 establishes that development will only be permitted where it does not result in pollution which is detrimental to quality of life or poses unacceptable risk to health or the natural environment. The proposed built form would adjoin the existing commercial unit and would not be sited closer to any neighbouring residential properties. The closest residential property is located to the north west of the application site on the other side of the access track (1- 4 Manor Court) whereby the closest dwelling (1 Manor Court) is sited circa 39m at its closest point (building to building). Given this intervening distance and scale, it is not considered that the development would give rise to any adverse overbearing effects, loss of outlook, overshadowing or loss of light to any neighbouring properties. With regard to noise, it is noted that the proposal would expect to be noise generating as a commercial unit. The business however is already in use and production levels could increase at any time in the existing building. The extension is to primarily accommodate storage space and ancillary requirements for the business (e.g. entrance, office, and improved staff facilities for changing and rest) with the existing space to be reused to accommodate space for plant and a boiler as well as a chiller room and a ripening room to meet needs arising during peak times (October to end November). Whilst there would be a resultant increase in floorspace of the building by 286m2, there would only be a forecasted 20% increase in cheese production (as outlined within the planning statement) with the space needed in order to work more efficiently. As such, it is not considered that the proposed extension would give rise to any significant adverse noise pollution above the existing situation as to justify refusal of planning permission. Concern has however been raised by the Parish Council and through the public representations as to the noise likely to be generated through vehicles accessing the site for deliveries and dispatch, having particular regard to the timing of vehicle movements in the interests of neighbouring amenities. From reviewing the planning history, it is noted that there are no restrictions on hours of working or deliveries. Under the previous application for a smaller extension (reference 18/01316/FUL), it was outlined that, because the extension did not increase the production floor space, it was not considered appropriate to impose conditions restricting vehicle movements. This is because production levels could have increased in any event within the original floorspace if demand required. As such it was concluded that such conditions would not meet the tests stipulated within the NPPF. In relation to the current application the development mainly provides for storage space and staff facilities with only a 20% increase in production. As outlined within a supporting statement from the applicant, the operational hours are normally 05:30 to 17:00 Monday to Friday with the occasional weekend and evening hours during busy periods (such as in the lead up to Christmas), and have been since 2010. It has been outlined that these hours are required for the process of cheese production with corresponding vehicular movements, albeit the timing for HGVs deliveries coming from Europe cannot be controlled. The applicant has indicated that commercial vehicles tend to be of a ‘box van’ type although one or two HGV’s visit per month delivering bulk packaging and removing liquid waste. It is stated that an advantage of the proposed

development is that the building will be provided with increased storage space which is intended to eliminate the need for any more regular HGV deliveries. The Environmental Health Officer reviewed the scheme and raised no objection on noise grounds pursuant to the cheese production, although has recommended a condition controlling the deliveries and dispatch of goods to the hours of 07:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and between 08:00 and 13:00 on a Saturday, with none on Sundays and Bank Holidays. This has been subject of concern to the applicant indicating that such a condition would place unreasonable restriction upon the operation of the business, stating also that other businesses along Stratchface Lane operate without time restrictions. The relationship to the nearby residential properties is noted. However given that this application considers an extension to an existing business which operates without restriction and that the additional floorspace does not equate to an equivalent increase in production, it is not considered necessary or reasonable to impose the condition requested by Environmental Health. Notwithstanding this, it is considered reasonable and necessary to impose conditions in relation to hours of construction work and construction deliveries in the interest of neighbouring amenities (see conditions 7 and 8). With these conditions recommended, the proposal is acceptable in terms of noise pollution. Finally, consideration has been given to light pollution, in which a number of public observations raised concerns about. It was requested by the public observations that no external lighting is located on the north western elevation and that no new windows are inserted on this elevation. In this regard, in the interests of amenity, it is considered reasonable to impose a condition that no external lighting is installed on site unless approved by the Local Planning Authority (as lights may be acceptable with appropriate illumination and designed to not reflect to the west) (see condition 13). In relation to openings, given that there are existing openings (window/doors) on this elevation, it is not considered reasonable to impose any conditions in this regard, noting as well that the building is single storey in nature. As such the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of impact upon neighbouring amenities and would accord with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Local Plan in this regard. Highways and Parking Policy CN9 sets out that development should provide appropriate on-site parking and should not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safely. Policy EM10 also requires on-site parking. Policy EP4 of the Local Plan outlines that proposals should be appropriate to the location when considering accessibility, and the impact on the local highway network.

Highway impacts

Scratchface Lane is an unclassified road and also serves as a Public Right of Way (By-Way 115/5/1). Policy EP4 outlines that the type of traffic generated and the appropriateness for the rural roads needs to be considered and that development would not generally be considered acceptable if there would be increased HGV use on unclassified roads.

The proposed development would double the footprint of the existing building and it is acknowledged that, as a result of the increased floorspace, there is potential for an increase in vehicles accessing the site linked to production and staff movements. As outlined as part of the Planning Statement the proposal could increase the maximum output by 20% over the current situation. The amount of employees are also projected to increase by 2 full time employees and 1 temporary worker (through October to December). It has also been stated that the main vehicle type used in association with the business is a ‘box van’ with minimum HGV vehicles. Given the use of the proposed floorspace for staff facilities, storage and to improve efficient working, it is not considered that vehicular movements using the unclassified road/public right of way would be so adverse as to justify refusal of planning permission. The access along Scatchface Lane is only circa 195m. The road is narrow in nature and would not adequately allow passing of vehicles in all parts, however given the limited nature of the length, and noting that there are no restrictions for HGVs to already use this access, this is not considered unacceptable and would not give rise to unacceptable highway safety impacts upon either vehicles or pedestrians using the highway/PRoW. Hampshire County Council Highways Team also considered the scheme and raised no objection on these grounds. Therefore, whilst an increase in HGV provision is generally considered unacceptable under Policy EP4, in this particular instance, noting the nearest classified road, the potential for HGVs or increased vehicle movements is considered acceptable. Hampshire County Council did however consider that a condition was required for a construction method statement in the interests of highway safety. This is considered acceptable as advised, however given the right of way nature of the Lane it is deemed reasonable to include reference to the right of way and the management along this. An informative is also proposed reminding the applicant about the right of way and the impact the construction works could have upon this. With this condition (see condition 4) and informative (number 5) in place the proposed development, on balance, is considered acceptable when considering the impacts upon the highway network and accords with Policy CN9 of the Local Plan.

Accessibility With regard to accessibility (as assessed under Policy EP4), it is considered that the site is acceptable in this regard due to the close nature from the A339 (located circa 195m from the access along Scratchface Lane). Although it is considered that Herriard is relatively remote, the accessibility to the A road is considered acceptable, noting as well that this is an existing enterprise. No objection is therefore raised in this regard.

New access It is proposed that the access point into the site would be relocated south to allow for the provision of the new extension. This new access point has been considered by the Local Highway Authority (Hampshire County Council) and following the submitted information is considered acceptable. A 2.4m by 43m visibility splay is proposed and whilst no speed survey was submitted by the applicant, from the Local Highway Authority’s on-site observations, it is considered unlikely that vehicle speeds are unlikely to exceed 30mph. It was therefore considered on this basis, and being mindful of the justification provided by the applicant, that the sightlines proposed are acceptable.

The Local Highway Authority recommended a condition that the access is built in accordance with the submitted plans and that no structure or planting exceeding 1m in height is placed within the visibility splays shown. This is considered reasonable and necessary in the interests of highway safety and thus is recommended (see condition 6). With this condition it is considered that the proposed access is acceptable and would not give rise to any adverse impacts upon highway safety (noting again that the access is just being relocated).

Parking and turning Consideration has also been given towards parking and turning on site. With regard to parking, under the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) a Class B2 use is required to provide 1 vehicular parking space for 45m2 of floorspace (in a rural area). As such, given the proposed floorspace is to be approximately 550sqm it is expected that 13 spaces are provided on site. In this regard thirteen spaces have been provided as demonstrated on the Site Plan (and are of the required size in accordance with the SPD) and therefore no objection is raised in this regard. In relation to cycle provision, no details have been provided in this regard. Given the available space on site, it is considered that there are ample areas for storage of cycles and as such, with a condition ensuring provision is made, no objection is raised (see condition 9). With regard to turning, tracking diagrams have been submitted to demonstrate that vehicles, including an HGV can turn within the application site. Whilst the ‘Rigid’ vehicle tracking plans demonstrate that turning is possible on site without inflicting on other vehicular parking areas, it is noted that a large artic (16.5m) would impact the three parking spaces at the front of the building. It is not considered desirable that the HGV turning area requires three vehicles to be relocated during deliveries and dispatches. Although this is noted, given that HGVs on site would not be a regular occurrence and that it is possible that the vehicles could be displaced on site (such as between the building and the boundary to the west which is empty to allow delivery and emptying of the existing foul water cess pit) this scenario, is not considered to give rise to any highway safety concern as to justify refusing planning permission. It was requested by the Highway Authority that a condition be imposed requiring that the development should not be brought into use until turning facilities have been provided and facilities shall be available for use by vehicles and kept free from obstruction throughout the lifetime of the development. The Officer then recommended a condition that the car parking area shall be marked out and maintained for the lifetime of the development and used for no other purpose. As explained above, the turning area for HGV vehicles would have to impede on the parking area and thus it is not possible that both these conditions can be imposed. It is therefore considered that a single condition be imposed requiring the vehicular parking area to be built out in accordance with the approved plans with the area only be used for parking, turning, loading or unloading of vehicles. With this condition (see condition 5) imposed the proposed development would be considered acceptable in terms of parking and turning provision in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Impact on heritage assets Policy EM11 establishes that proposals must conserve or enhance the quality of the borough's heritage assets. Policy EM11 states that proposals will be permitted where they demonstrate an understanding of the character and respect historic interest and local character.

The site is located within an area of archaeological potential which is protected due to being a heritage asset under Policy EM11 of the Local Plan. Hampshire County Council Archaeology Team was consulted as part of the application process which confirmed that no objections are raised in terms of archaeology. As such, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of impacts upon archaeology and accords with Policy EM11 of the Local Plan. Energy efficiency Policy EM9 of the Local Plan sets out a requirement to ensure that water resources within new development are used sustainably through the imposition of a water efficiency standard. Under this Policy it outlines that non-residential development of 1000sqm gross floor area or more should met the BREEAM ‘excellent’ standards for water consumption. In this regard the additional floorspace would be 286sqm and the resultant building would be 550sqm thus is below the required policy threshold. As such whilst it is encouraged that the proposal meets the BREEAM ‘excellent’ standards, under Policy EM9 there is no requirement to control this through condition. Policy EM10 of the Local Plan sets out that development should provide buildings which are able to respond to environmental change and which minimise energy consumption through sustainable approaches to design. Policy EM10 b) and f) additionally require that new development incorporates and/or promotes renewable and low carbon energy technologies. In this instance, it is considered reasonable that a condition be imposed to secure details of how the development might incorporate Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP) (see condition 14). Furthermore an informative is to be attached to advise that the development considers a proactive response to the Council Climate Change Emergency. Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The required forms have been submitted for CIL contributions to be calculated if applicable. From these forms, it would appear that the development would be Cil liable, but would attract a £nil charge in line with the Council's Charging Schedule. Pre commencement Conditions

The recommendation proposes pre-commencement planning conditions therefore in accordance with section 100ZA of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Pre-commencement Conditions) Regulations 2018, the Local Planning Authority served notice upon the applicant to seek agreement to the imposition of such conditions. Notice was served and the agreement will be outlined within the update paper. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans:

- Location Plan - Drawing No. 8497/06 - Proposed Floor Plan and 'Visible' front and side elevations - Drawing No.

8497/02

- Block Plan - Drawing No. 8497/04 Rev B - Visibility Splays - Drawing No. 5558/001 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

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

years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture those on the approved plans and application forms. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 No development shall take place, (including any works of demolition), until a

Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved statement shall include scaled drawings illustrating the provision for - 1) The parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles. 2) Loading and unloading of plant and materials. 3) Management of construction traffic and access routes, including a strategy

for traffic management along the Public Right of Way which could involve the erection of signs warning drivers of the presence of pedestrians and the need to give way, the implementation of a low-speed limit, and the use of banksmen.

4) Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the use commence,

whichever is the sooner, until the vehicle parking has been constructed, surfaced and marked out in accordance with the approved details (Block Plan - Drawing No. 8497/04 Rev B) and that area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6 The proposed development and use hereby approved shall not be occupied or

use commenced, whichever is sooner, until the vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans with the 2.4m x 43m visibility splays. Within the splays any obstruction between the height of 1m and 3m above the level of the adjacent carriageway shall be cleared. The splays shall be maintained at all times thereafter. REASON To provide satisfactory access and in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, or fitting out, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays.

REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

8 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until the property has

provision within its curtilage for secure cycle parking facilities for 2 long and 1 short stay places. REASON: To improve provision for cyclists and discourage the use of the private car wherever possible and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

10 No article of any description shall be manufactured, assembled, altered, repaired

or stored outside the building hereby approved. REASON: In the interest of the amenities of the area in accordance Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

11 The proposed new access shall not be brought into use until the existing vehicular

access to the site has been stopped up. The boundary hedge shown on the Block Plan (Drawing No. 8497/04 Rev B) to be used for stopping up the access shall match the existing mix of hedgerow on site and shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the stopping up of the existing access. Any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and highway safety and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

12 The extension hereby approved and resultant building shall be used only for

cheese production use (and associated products) and for no other purpose whatsoever (including any other use within Classes E(g), Class B2 or Class B8 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2015 (as amended) or in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification). REASON: In order to ensure that the Local Planning Authority has control over the site, given the countryside location whereby other uses within the same use classes may not be acceptable in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 - 2029.

13 No external lighting shall be installed on site until details of such lighting, including

hours of operation, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The equipment shall thereafter be operated and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme. REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

14 Prior to occupation/use first commencing of the development hereby approved, details of electric vehicle charging provision shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details should include the specification, appearance and siting of any charging points. Where charging points are not proposed, details of parking areas which can be conveniently retrofitted at a later date shall be provided. This includes details demonstrating that that electrical connections within the site are suitable for future use for electric vehicle charging. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior to occupation due to the lack of information submitted in this regard as part of the application in accordance with the guidance contained within the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) and Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 to 2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

- seeking further information following receipt of the application; - seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the

application; - considering the imposition of conditions and or the completion of a s.106

legal agreement (in accordance with paragraphs 55-58).

In this instance: - the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

4. The planning permission does not authorise the undertaking of any works within

the highway (carriageway, footway or verge). A license/permit should be obtained from Hampshire County Council at Hampshire County Highways, Jacobs Gutter Lane, Totton, Southampton, Hampshire, SO409TQ. Tel: 0845 603 5633. Email: roads@hants.gov.uk. Website: www.hants.gov.uk/highways.

5. The Applicant is reminded that appropriate traffic management should be

maintained along the public right way. The Applicant is made aware of the following:

Nothing connected with the development or its future use should have an adverse effect on the right of way, which must remain available for public use at all times.

Any damage caused to the surface of the public right of way by construction traffic will be required to be restored to the satisfaction of the Countryside Area Access Manager on the completion of the build.

There must be no surface alterations to a public right of way without the consent of Hampshire County Council as Highway Authority. To carry out any such works without this permission would constitute an offence under s131 Highways Act 1980.

No builders or contractor's vehicles, machinery, equipment, materials, scaffolding or anything associated with the works should be left on or near the by-way so as to obstruct, hinder or provide a hazard to walkers.

All vehicles would be accessing the site via a public by-way should give way to public users, which could include horse-riders and cyclists, at all times.

If there is likely to be an effect on the by-way in terms of dust, noise or other obstruction during the period of the works that is deemed to be a risk to users of the by-way, the applicant should contact the Hampshire County Council Right of Way office directly to discuss the Temporary Closure of the footpath. Temporary Closure Orders should be applied for at least 6 weeks prior to the commencement of works and details of how to apply can be found at: https://protect-eu.mimecast.com/s/3eaVC9155i4GYqfEHj8H?domain=hants.gov.uk.

Location plan

Site Plan

Proposed Floor Plan

Proposed Elevations

Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 5

Application no: 21/00544/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land To South West Of Castle Cottages Newtown Common Hampshire

Proposal Erection of new detached 4 bedroom dwelling

Registered: 16 February 2021 Expiry Date: 10 September 2021

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Meredith Baker 01256 845444

Applicant: Stanley John Ltd Agent: Ms Kerry Pleger

Ward: Evingar Ward Member(s): Cllr Samuel Carr Cllr John Izett Cllr Graham Falconer

Parish: NEWTOWN CP OS Grid Reference: 447724 163446

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposal would result in the erection of one dwelling in the countryside in a

location that is not isolated. The proposal is considered to represent a sustainable form of development. The dwelling is also considered to be sited on previously developed land. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies SD1 and SS6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The proposed dwelling would be of an appropriate design and siting, would relate

to surrounding development and would not result in significant impacts on the local landscape character or scenic quality of the area. As such the proposal complies with Section 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

3. The proposed development would not harm the significance of the nearby Grade

II Listed Building 'Thatched Cottage' or the Locally Listed 'Newtown Village Hall'. Having due regard to Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the proposal is considered to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue

overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety and adequate parking would be provided to serve the development. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

6. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on biodiversity

and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021). Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

7. The proposed development, subject to a tree protection plan condition, would not

cause any adverse impact on nearby trees and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

General comments The application was considered by the Development Control Committee meeting on the 11th August 2021 in accordance with the council’s scheme of delegation due to the number of objections received and the Officer’s recommendation for approval. At that meeting Members resolved to defer the application to undertake a Member’s site viewing. The recommendation for the item at the August Committee outlined that it was subject to no new considerations being received from Hampshire County Council Countryside Access Team (i.e. Rights of Way) and the Ramblers Association. Since this time the consultation period for these two consultees has ended. The Countryside Access Team has responded as set out and considered below. As such the recommendation has been amended to remove the reference to the consultations and is recommended to be granted subject to the conditions at the end of this report. There has been no material change in planning policy since the assessment of the application which was before Members in August 2021. Consultations Hampshire County Council Countryside Service: No objection subject to a condition and an informative. Comments in summary:

- Footpaths 25 or 26 form the proposed vehicular access to the development site. - There are no recorded public vehicular rights over Footpath 25 or 26. It is an

offence under s34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to drive over a public footpath, bridleway or restricted byway without lawful authority.

- The public rights of way do not fall within the red or blue line boundaries. - The applicant does not appear to own the land necessary to access the site from

Harts Lane which is the nearest vehicular highway, indicating that such authority may not exist. Lawful authority can be provided by owning the land or having the permission of the landowner.

- Private access rights may be recorded within the deeds of the property or with Land Registry.

- The applicant should demonstrate that authority exists and that this permission

extends to the development as proposed. - Construction traffic will need to cross the public rights of way and this route should

be kept open throughout the construction period, and an appropriate traffic management system be secured and implemented through condition to ensure the safety and convenience of users of the rights of way.

- An informative is requested to make the applicant aware of requirements relating to the impact of the construction process on the Public Right of Way.

Assessment Impact on the Public Right of Way In considering the comments from the Hampshire County Council Countryside Service, reference has first been made to private rights of access to the site under the Road Traffic Act 1988 which sit as separate legislation and outside of the determination of the planning application. It has also been requested that a traffic management system is secured to ensure the safety and convenience of users of the rights of way. It is considered that these details can be satisfactorily covered within the recommended Construction Method Statement condition (see condition 14). In particular this condition requests information regarding the erection of signage (which can warn drivers of presence of pedestrians and the need to give way), as well as implementation of a low-speed limit. It was also recommended by the Countryside Service that an informative be imposed to address the construction impacts on the Public Right of Way which has already been imposed within Informative number 7 and does not require alteration. As such the comments received do not alter the assessment of the proposal which remains as per the Committee report and the Update Paper to the Development Control Committee meeting on the 13th August 2021. The recommendation also remains as previously reported with no changes to the recommended conditions or informatives. The recommendation is therefore for the application to be granted subject to the conditions and informatives in the report at Appendix A along with an additional condition (number 18) as set out within the Update Paper at Appendix B. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans:

- Location Plan - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/01 Rev A - Site Plan - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/03 Rev E - Proposed Floor Plans - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/04 Rev D - Proposed Elevations - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/05 Rev C

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 No development above damp proof course shall take place until details/specification of the types and colours of external materials to be used, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 Notwithstanding the approved plans no soft landscaping works shall commence

on site until a scheme of landscaping which shall specify species, planting sizes, spacing and numbers of trees/shrubs to be planted (including replacement trees where appropriate) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works approved shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the building(s) or when the use hereby permitted is commenced. In addition, a maintenance programme detailing all operations to be carried out in order to allow successful establishment of planting, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the landscaping works. Any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. REASON: Details are required in the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5 Notwithstanding the approved plans no hard landscaping works shall commence

on site until details of the materials to be used for hard and paved surfacing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved surfacing shall be completed before the adjoining buildings are first occupied and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the application and in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until a

technical report and a certification of compliance demonstrating that the development has achieved the water efficiency standard of 110 litres of water per person per day (or less) has been submitted (by an independent and suitably accredited body) to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior to occupation because insufficient information was provided within the application and to improve the overall sustainability of the development, in accordance with Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 Prior to occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, parking provision and

turning areas in accordance with those shown on the approved Site Plan (Drawing Number: 2071/PL/03 Rev E) shall be made within the site and shall be retained thereafter for such purposes. REASON: To ensure adequate on site car parking provision for the approved development in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and

Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. 8 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays. . REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

10 The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until details of the

refuse/recycling collection point(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before occupation or the use commences, whichever is the sooner, and shall be thereafter retained and maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse and recycling collection and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the adjoining highway, in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029

11 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the property has provision within its curtilage for secure cycle parking facilities for 3 long and 1 short stay places. The cycle storage shall thereafter be retained and maintained in perpetuity. REASON: To improve provision for cyclists and discourage the use of the private car wherever possible and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

12 No development, including any site clearance shall take place on site until an

arboricultural method statement is submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The arboricultural method statement shall outline how trees and hedges will be protected during the development; including any engineering solutions deemed appropriate, and shall include an appropriately scaled tree and hedge protection site plan. All arboricultural detailing shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval, and shall be produced in accordance with BS5837 "Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction". No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved arboricultural detailing and any tree protection measures shall be retained for the duration of the construction works. REASON: Details are required to ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

13 Development shall be undertaken in adherence with the biodiversity mitigation and enhancement measures contained within Chapter 6 Mitigation Recommendations of the Ecology Report by Davidson-Watts Ecology Ltd dated 5/7/2018. REASON: In order to avoid adverse impacts on key species and habitats and deliver net gains for biodiversity in line with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029. In order to prevent adverse impacts on key species (birds, reptiles and amphibians) protected under The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

14 No development shall start on site until a construction method statement has

been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, which shall include: (a) the provision of facilities for contractor parking are made available on site: (b) the arrangements for deliveries associated with all construction works to be

made on site; (c) access and egress for plant and machinery; (d) location of temporary site buildings, compounds, construction materials and

plant storage areas; (e) erection of signs warning drivers of the presence of pedestrians and the need

to give way, (f) the implementation of a low-speed limit Construction work shall only take place in accordance with the approved method statement. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement in order that the Local Planning Authority can properly consider the effect of the works on the amenity of the locality and in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

15 Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no building, structure or other alteration permitted by Class A; B; E; or F; of Part 1; of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected on the application site. REASON: To prevent the overdevelopment of the site in the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to safeguard the character of the local landscape, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

16 The first floor windows at first floor level on the western side elevation of the

proposed dwelling shall be glazed with obscured glass, to at least the equivalent of Pilkington level 4 standard. The window and glazing shall be installed prior to occupation of the development and shall be permanently maintained in that condition. REASON: To protect the privacy of the adjacent properties and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

17 No development, excluding any site clearance, shall take place on site until full

details of the method of disposal of foul sewage, together with an assessment on impact upon the water environment, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained.

REASON: In the absence of sufficient detail accompanying the application and to ensure a satisfactory means of disposal of foul sewage, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029).

18 The dwelling hereby approved shall not be occupied until provision has been made to manage surface water drainage within the curtilage of the dwelling which manages surface water at the existing infiltration rates without increasing flood risk. The drainage system shall be maintained in perpetuity. REASON: To manage water on the site in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

- seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the

application; - considering the imposition of conditions.

In this instance:

- the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

4. If during development works any contamination of the land is encountered or

suspected then this shall be fully assessed in accordance with the Contaminated Land Guidance for Developers. The developer must contact the Local Planning Authority as soon as possible and any action should be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5. If this development will result in new postal addresses or changes in addresses,

please contact the council's Street Naming and Numbering team on 01256 845539 or email shirley.brewer@basingstoke.gov.uk to commence the process. Details can be found on the council's website

6. The Council encourages all contractors to be 'Considerate Contractors' when

working in the Borough by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment.

7. The Applicant is reminded that appropriate traffic management should be

maintained along the public right way. The Applicant is made aware of the following:

Nothing connected with the development or its future use should have an adverse effect on the right of way, which must remain available for public use at all times.

Any damage caused to the surface of the public right of way by construction traffic will be required to be restored to the satisfaction of the Countryside Area Access Manager on the completion of the build.

There must be no surface alterations to a public right of way without the consent of Hampshire County Council as Highway Authority. To carry out any such works without this permission would constitute an offence under s131 Highways Act 1980.

No builders or contractor's vehicles, machinery, equipment, materials, scaffolding or anything associated with the works should be left on or near the Footpath so as to obstruct, hinder or provide a hazard to walkers.

All vehicles would be accessing the site via a public Footpath should give way to public users, which could include horse-riders and cyclists, at all times.

Appendix A – Report to the 11 August 2021 Development Control Committee

Cttee: 11 August 2021 Item No. 5

Application no: 21/00544/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land To South West Of Castle Cottages Newtown Common Hampshire

Proposal Erection of new detached 4 bedroom dwelling

Registered: 16 February 2021 Expiry Date: 13 August 2021

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Meredith Baker 01256 845444

Applicant: Stanley John Ltd Agent: Ms Kerry Pleger

Ward: Evingar Ward Member(s): Cllr Samuel Carr Cllr John Izett Cllr Graham Falconer

Parish: NEWTOWN CP OS Grid Reference: 447724 163446

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report and subject to no new material considerations being received from Hampshire County Council Rights of Way Team and the Ramblers Association.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposal would result in the erection of one dwelling in the countryside in a

location that is not isolated. The proposal is considered to represent a sustainable form of development. The dwelling is also considered to be sited on previously development land. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies SD1 and SS6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The proposed dwelling would be of an appropriate design and siting, would relate

to surrounding development and would not result in significant impacts on the local landscape character or scenic quality of the area. As such the proposal complies with Section 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

3. The proposed development would not harm the significance of the nearby Grade

II Listed Building 'Thatched Cottage' or the Locally Listed 'Newtown Village Hall'. Having due regard to Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the proposal is considered to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue

overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety and adequate parking would be provided to serve the development. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

6. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on biodiversity

and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021). Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

7. The proposed development, subject to a tree protection plan condition, would not

cause any adverse impact on nearby trees and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

General comments This application is bought to the Development Control Committee due the number of objections received and the Officer's recommendation for approval in accordance with the Council's scheme of delegation. Planning Policy Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan comprises the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 which locates the site outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary and is therefore within the countryside for planning purposes. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 2 (Achieving Sustainable Development) Section 4 (Decision making) Section 5 (Delivering a sufficient supply of homes) Section 8 (Promoting healthy and safe communities) Section 9 (Promoting sustainable transport) Section 11 (Making effective use of land) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 14 (Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Section 16 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) Planning Practice Guidance Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption on Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) Policy SS6 (New Housing in the Countryside) Policy CN1 (Affordable Housing)

Policy CN6 (Infrastructure) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM5 (Green Infrastructure) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (The Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Housing Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Heritage Supplementary Planning Document (2019) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Description of Site The application site comprises a parcel of land located to the rear of numbers. 3 and 4 Castle Cottages and is currently enclosed to all sides with fencing and mature hedging. The site is predominately laid to grass although there is an existing hardstanding slab, which previously housed a timber outbuilding (which is visible on the site photographs under planning reference 18/02095/OUT). The site is accessed from the south western boundary onto an adjacent un-metalled track which leads to Well Street. Mature Ash, Willow and Oak trees are sited within, or adjacent to, the application site. Proposal The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a detached four bedroom dwelling. The dwelling would have a maximum depth of 13.4 metres at ground floor level and 9.7 metres at first floor level. With regard to the width, at ground floor level it would be 10.8 metres and at first floor it would be 9 metres. The maximum ridge height would be 7.2 metres with an eaves height of 4.5 metres. In relation to design, the proposal would be two storey with three front dormer windows set within the eaves on the front elevation. There would be two single storey aspects to the proposal, a ‘side’ element and a rear element. A storm porch is also proposed on the front elevation. It is also proposed that a vehicular access would be formed off the unmade track and the front of the site would be laid to paving for vehicular car parking. A cycle shed would be located in the corner of the site.

Amendments During the course of the application the single storey ‘rear’ element was reduced in scale by 0.5 metres and the flat roof construction was amended to a false pitched roof. The dwelling was also brought forward within the site by 1 metre to enlarge the rear garden size. Consultations Newtown Parish Council (Initial comments): “Newtown Parish Council (NPC) has considered the subject application. We note that the height and footprint of the application would appear to exceed that described in the Outline Planning submission as approved by the Inspector. NPC is concerned that the proposed development will overlook neighbouring properties including the community amenity of the village hall. In that context there is also concern that the proximity to the village hall and a downward ground inclination is likely to present problems of surface water run-off, which should be accounted for in the construction. The area has no mains drainage so it is important that planning approval identifies the location of a septic tank and associated soakaway such that they will not adversely affect neighbouring properties or lead to water pollution. The developer should ensure that the removal of any trees from the site is in accordance with the earlier arboriculture impact statement. The access to the site has been purchased from Hampshire County Council (HCC), the Common landowner. Access has only been granted along the easterly of the two tracks that lead from the C45. Neither construction traffic nor subsequent residential traffic has a right to use the westerly track that leads to the village hall. HCC has also specified that there are no associated rights to park on Common land. Thus it is necessary for this constraint to be included in the planning approval and that the developer and builder accept the limitation so imposed. Appropriate signage should be installed before construction starts to ensure that only the easterly track is used. In addition, any damage that construction traffic causes to the access track must be made good when construction is complete. The NPC remains concerned about the impact that heavy plant and other construction traffic will have using narrow, unadopted tracks. The developer should supervise the build in such a way that adverse effects on neighbouring properties is minimised.” (Final comments): “Newtown Parish Council has no further comment to make regarding this amendment. Please refer to our original submission on the 16th March 2021.” Natural England: No comment. Highways: No comment on the plans with direction towards standing advice. Environmental Health: No objection subject to conditions. Waste Team: Comment that Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council operates a kerbside waste collection service from access to the south of the site.

Public Observations Sixteen letters of objection were received in relation to the application. The concern raised are as follows (in summary): Change to the extant permission

Proposal is not the claimed ‘detached chalet bungalow style dwelling’.

Whilst the dwelling is larger than the previous outline permission, the site is smaller.

Proposal cannot be constituted minor residential development.

Footprint has changed considerably since the outline application was granted.

The additional height of the dwelling (than the previous chalet bungalow proposed) would overlook and result in loss of privacy and light towards 3 and 4 Castle Cottages.

Concern over history whereby the land was not classified as residential prior to 2011.

Planting of proposed boundary hedge included in the outline permission has been removed and replaced by lower, dispersed shrubs.

Design/Character of the Area

The proposed height would be several metres higher than the neighbouring hall and is at a higher level.

Expectation that the agreed hedge at 4m height is enforced.

Development would be cluttered and visually congested.

Size, scale, layout and style of the proposed dwelling is out of character and proportion with 1, 2, 3 and 4 Castle Cottages.

Planning provision for four parking spaces (the original plans) out of proportion to plot size.

No need for a large executive house of this design.

Proposal is contrary to Policy EM1 where it would be detrimental to the character and visual quality of the area and contrary to Policy EM10 where it would not be visually attractive nor respectful of the local environment and amenities of neighbouring properties.

Neighbour Impact

The proposed height and size of the dwelling would adversely impact the light and amenity of those using the nearby hall.

Development covers a large amount of the plot and would increase overshadowing towards 3 and 4 Castle Cottages.

Vibrations and constructions works may damage nearby properties. Need to hand dig foundations and use of machinery reduced, noting that some nearby buildings have no foundations.

Concern the proposal would devalue neighbouring properties.

Noise pollution from construction traffic.

Concern that the proposal would result in an owner running a business from the site as a result of a home office.

Builders should be signed up to Considerate Construction Scheme.

In 2011 a single storey outbuilding at 3 Castle Cottages had a restrictive condition that no openings would face 4 Castle Cottages and now a full two storey dwelling would have direct views from the new dwelling to number 4.

Highways

Access to the dwelling is a narrow single track used by families.

No room in the locality for visitors to visit the large developed property outside the site. Construction works could cause damage to the access track which should be repaired by the developer.

Construction vehicles should be controlled to not park on the access track or the Common.

Access is onto a dangerous bend with no spaces for vehicles to pass.

The movement of the access to the west would shift the access closer to a 90 degree bend which would have a highway safety risk.

Drainage/flooding/water

No provision made in relation to surface water run-off.

Building regulations require the discharge point of a sewage package treatment plant to be at least 10 metres from other buildings – the village hall is 16m away but downhill.

No detailed drainage plan for processed foul sewage water.

Concern over the requirement of 110 litres of water per person per day and the sewage treatment plant discharging water into a drainage channel, pipe or soakaway.

Flood risk to neighbouring properties.

Quoted 110 litres per person per day could adversely impact supply to other properties.

No mains sewage in this enclave.

Biodiversity/trees

Concern over impact on amphibians and reptiles as well as hedgehogs.

Ecological report is incorrect as states ponds within 250m have been studied but Thatched Cottage has a pond not investigated, nor a pond at Court Farm Stables.

No trees should be removed.

Relevant Planning History

18/02095/OUT Outline application for matters of access and

layout, for the erection of a dwelling with hard

and soft landscaping and associated works

Allowed

on appeal

14.02.2019

Assessment Planning History Outline planning permission has been gained on site for the erection of one dwelling under planning reference 18/02095/OUT and appeal reference APP/H1705/W/19/3222118. The appeal was submitted due to non-determination; however the scheme had the recommendation to refuse the application for a new dwelling on this site for the following reasons:

1 The application has failed to demonstrate that it meets the criteria to be considered as an exception to the general policy of restraint for housing in the countryside. There is no justification for departing from the Development Plan Policies or any other material considerations such to establish the principle of development which would be of sufficient weight for the creation of an additional dwelling on this site. The proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and Policies SS1 and SS6(e) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2 The proposed development would, due to its location and siting result in an

incongruous form of development which would fail to respect the established pattern a verdant character of the surrounding area. As such, the development would not successfully integrate with the surrounding built form and would be detrimental to the visual amenity and character of the area. This would be contrary to the requirements of Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 - 2029 and the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

Within the appeal decision the Inspector considered that the land was previously development land in accordance with Policy SS6 of the Local Plan. With regard to the character of the area, it was noted that Newtown Common is characterised by random scattering of dwellings with no singular character in terms of size of dwelling, relationship to access tracks, size of plot or of storey height. It was outlined that the appeal site dwelling would be set a reasonable distance away from Castle Cottages (many dwellings being much closer) and the plot size is bigger than a number in the immediate vicinity. It therefore was outlined that it cannot be reasonably described as cramped or visually congested. The proposed dwelling was therefore considered acceptable in this regard in relation to the outlined application for one dwelling. This outline permission remains extant for the site, however the current submission if for a separate full application. This decision does however form a material consideration for this application. Principle of development The site is located outside any Settlement Policy Boundary (SPB) and is within part of the borough which is designated as countryside as per Policy SS1 (Scale and distribution of new housing) of the Local Plan. The Local Plan is explicit in its aims 'to direct development to within the identified Settlement Policy Boundaries and specific site allocations. Within the countryside it is the intention to maintain the existing open nature of the borough's countryside, prevent the coalescence of settlements and resist the encroachment of development into rural areas. The countryside is therefore subject to a more restrictive policy'. Policy SS1 sets out a spatial strategy for the Local Authority to meet its full housing need over the Plan period. The strategy is principally based upon the development of allocated Greenfield sites and the redevelopment of land in the towns and villages. Development in the countryside is generally restricted. The most relevant Local Plan policy for the proposal is Policy SS6 (New Housing in the Countryside) which sets out the exceptional circumstances where it is appropriate to allow new housing development in the countryside. Policy SS6 states that development in the countryside will only be permitted if the site is on previously developed land; is part of a rural exception scheme; is for the re-use of an existing building; involves the replacement of an existing dwelling;

is small scale to meet a locally agreed need; is required to support an existing rural business; or is allocated by a Neighbourhood Plan. As outlined in the above section the application site has already been assessed by the Planning Inspector to be previously developed land under the extant permission on site in accordance with Policy SS6 criteria a) of the Local Plan. Policy SS6 criteria a) which refers to proposals on 'previously developed land'. The NPPF provides a definition of Previously Developed Land (PDL) within its glossary at annex 2, this states that PDL is:

"Land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land (although it should not be assumed that the whole of the curtilage should be developed) and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. This excludes: land that is or was last occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings; land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill, where provision for restoration has been made through development management procedures; land in built-up areas such as residential gardens, parks, recreation grounds and allotments; and land that was previously developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape."

The application site is currently used as garden land and thus attention was given towards if it is in a ‘built up’ location. In this regard the Inspector found that the dwelling is located within the settlement of Newtown however given the scattered nature of the development it was not described as a built-up area. As such the site was considered previously developed land. No changes to the immediate area have occurred since this decision (such as any new builds in the immediate locality) and thus is considered to still be the case. Policy SS6 criterion a) goes on to stated that new housing would only be permitted on previously developed land provided that:

i) They do not result in an isolated form of development; and ii) The site is not of high environmental value; and iii) The proposed use and scale of development is appropriate to the site’s

context Firstly consideration is afforded to if the dwelling would be in isolated form of development. The NPPF does not provide a definition of what constitutes 'isolated' development. In considering whether or not the current application site is isolated in light of the paragraph 80, reference has been given to case law and recent planning appeal decisions, beyond the definition within the Local Plan. The Courts have held that 'isolated' for the purposes of the NPPF, should be given its ordinary meaning as 'far away from other places, building and people' remote'. The judgement therefore concluded that the context of paragraph 55 of the previous NPPF (2012), now paragraph 80 (2021), 'isolated' simply connotes a dwelling that is physically separate or remote from a settlement. Whether, in a particular case, a group of dwellings constitutes a settlement, or a 'village', for the purposes of the policy will again be a matter of fact and planning judgment for the decision-maker. The Court rejected the argument that the word 'isolated' as set out within the NPPF could have a dual meaning, being physically isolated or functionally isolated (isolated from services and facilities).

In applying this guidance to the current case, the application site is considered to be located within the meaningful collection of dwellings in which forms the settlement of Newtown. The proposed dwelling would not be visually or physically isolated to the dwellings forms Newtown whereby dwellings are immediate to the north, east and west. The Inspector for the extant permission found no conflict with Policy SS6 and outlines that this part of Newtown is a ‘settlement’. As such the proposal accords with Policy SS6 criterion a) i). In relation to criterion a) ii). The existing site is used as residential land and thus is not considered of high environmental value. Finally in relation to criterion a) iii) the proposal, as will be assessed below, is considered of a scale appropriate to the site context. The proposal is considered to accord with Policy SS6 of the Local Plan. However, the weight to be afforded to these policies will need to be considered in light of the council's current 5 year housing land supply position, as set out below within the Planning Balance Section of this report.

Housing Land Supply In providing for sustainable development, the NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to identify a five year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. For BDBC, and in line with the Housing Delivery Test published in January 2021, a 5% buffer should be added to the borough's supply. Against this requirement, at the current time, the council is unable to demonstrate that it has 5 years' worth of deliverable sites. This means that policies relating to housing delivery in the borough's adopted Local Plan and made Neighbourhood Plans are currently considered to be out of date. Planning applications will therefore be considered in line with paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF which states that where relevant policies are considered out of date permission will be granted unless the application of policies in the Framework (NPPF) that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed (paragraph 11 d (i)) or any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole (paragraph 11 d(ii)). The footnote to this statement is clear that the protected areas or important assets referenced in 11 d (i) are those policies in the NPPF relating to: habitats sites and/or designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest; Green Belt, Local Green Space, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a National Park (or within the Broads Authority) or defined as Heritage Coast; irreplaceable habitats; designated heritage assets (and other heritage assets of archaeological interest); and areas at risk of flooding or coastal change. This site is located within the setting of a designated (and non-designated) heritage asset and thus paragraph 11 d (i) is engaged in relation to ‘designated heritage assets (and other heritage assets of archaeological interest). This report will assess the impact upon heritage under the ‘Impact on designated and non-designated heritage assets’ section. This report will also evaluate the application against the relevant Development Plan Policies and an assessment of the development in light of the above, and the balance required by paragraph 11(d) (ii) of the NPPF will be given in the 'Planning Balance and Conclusion' section of this report.

National Planning Policy Framework The NPPF is a material consideration in the decision-taking process. The NPPF sets out the Government's planning policy for England and places sustainable development at the heart of the decision-taking process incorporating objectives for economic, social and environmental protection. These objectives seek to balance growth and local community needs against protection of the natural, built and historic environment. For rural housing, paragraphs 78-80 of the NPPF are the most relevant to the consideration of this proposal for a new dwelling. Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the viability of rural communities. Furthermore, Paragraph 80 of the NPPF states that 'Planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside…’ In this regard, as assessed above, the development is not considered isolated. In addressing the proposal against the wider objectives of sustainable development of the NPPF and Policy SD1 of the Local Plan, Economically the proposed development would encourage development and associated economic growth through the physical building works. The future occupants would also contribute to the local economy and to the continued viability of local services in surrounding villages. However, as this proposal would apply to an increase in one dwelling only, the economic role of the development is therefore considered to be limited. In terms of the social objective, the provision of one dwelling in this location would not make a significant contribution to the Council's housing supply position. However the development would provide a new dwelling, create the opportunity for future occupiers of the site to develop social and community ties within the area and facilitate future community involvement. Finally with regard to the environmental objective of this development, the proposal could reasonably be expected to demonstrate a degree of inherent sustainability through compliance with Council supported energy efficiency and Building Regulations standards. The proposal would therefore meet the three objectives of sustainable development as to justify the proposal for a single residential dwelling in this location.

Summary on the principle of development The principle of the proposed development would be in accordance with the Local Plan, namely SS1 and SS6 (criterion a). However, as set out above, Local Plan Policies SS1 and SS6 are currently considered to be out of date given the Council's inability to demonstrate 5 years' worth of deliverable sites triggered by paragraph 73 of the NPPF. In having regard to the NPPF, particularly paragraph 8 in relation to sustainable development and paragraph 80 in regards to Rural Housing, the application site is considered to represent a sustainable location for new residential development. The weight afforded to Policies SS1 and SS6 is reduced in accordance with paragraph 11 of the NPPF. Further consideration on this matter is therefore set out in the planning balance section below. Further discussion is also had within the planning balance taking into account other material considerations, which are addressed within the sections below.

Affordable Housing Local Plan Policy CN1 requires the provision of 40% affordable housing as part of new residential development. Whilst the requirements of the Local Plan are acknowledged, the Council is additionally mindful of the more recent guidance contained within paragraph 63 of the NPPF, which sets out that the "provision of affordable housing should not be sought for residential development that are not major development (10 units or more), other than in designated rural areas (where policies may set out a low threshold of 5 units or fewer)". The NPPF also sets out a site area threshold of 0.5ha. As the NPPF is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, this recent guidance is afforded weight and the requirements set out in Policy CN1 in this regard are therefore considered to be out of date. Consequently, in this instance, as the 10 unit trigger is not met and the site is less than 0.5ha, it is not necessary in accordance with the NPPF for affordable housing provision to be sought in relation to this development. Impact on the character of the area/ design The NPPF (Chapter 12) states that creating high quality buildings and places is fundamental to achieving good planning and development. Locally, Policy EM1 states that development will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area and are supported by a comprehensive landscaping scheme. This sits in conjunction with Policy EM10 which requires development to be informed by the local context in terms of design and siting in order to contribute towards local distinctiveness and be visually attractive. The proposed new dwelling would be located in a highly visible plot, altering the appearance of the street scene. In this immediately locality, as visible from the application site, there is no prevailing character to note, whereby the dwellings and plots are varied in nature. This view was also made by the Planning Inspector who described Newtown Common as being a random scattering of dwellings which “do not have any singular character in terms of size of dwelling, relationship to access tracks, size of plot, or of storey height.” In first considering the plot size, it is noted that a number of public observations have raised concern that the plot size has been decreased from the extant outline application. The plot size has very slightly decreased under this application however it is reminded that this is a new full application as opposed to the reserved matters application in connection with the outline permission. As noted above, the plots sizes within the locality are varied, and it is not considered, in particular in light of the appeal decision, that the plot size is out of keeping with the area and would be appropriate for a new dwelling. With regard to the proposed site, it is noted that the application site currently has a verdant area with no built form, which is well vegetated. Whilst the verdant character would be lost as a result of a dwelling, it would still be appropriately sited within the cluster of dwellings forming the settlement of Newtown. New dwellings undoubtedly alter the landscape in which it sits within, however by virtue of appropriate siting in the settlement, and noting the extant permission it is considered acceptable. To the immediate west of the application site the unmade track is the Public Right of Way footpath (route number 170/24/2). Although this is noted, given the settlement siting and retained boundary treatment the enjoyment of this public right of way would be

maintained whereby the sense of place would be retained in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan. Considerable concern has been raised through the public observations in relation to the size of the new dwelling, in particular in comparison with the extant outline permission which the layout outlined a smaller dwelling (in a slightly larger plot) and it was also stipulated that the dwelling would be a detached chalet bungalow style. As set out above, this application is a new full application and the outline application did not provide the design of the dwelling (which would have been controlled by the reserved matters application). In considering the proposal submitted before the Local Planning Authority, by virtue of size, design and siting the proposed new dwelling would not give rise to unacceptable impacts upon the character of the area or street scene and would not result in an unacceptably cramped plot. Whilst the dwelling is large, the settlement is varied in its character and given the retained space around the plot it is not considered the dwelling would overdevelop the site. In particular it is noted that the proposal has a single storey rear and side projection which reduces the bulk and mass of the dwelling and would appear as typical additions to a property (which are of permitted development rights sizing). It is however considered reasonable to impose a condition restricting permitted development rights for the property to control any future developments in the interests of visual amenity and to prevent overdevelopment of the site. The design of the dwelling is of appropriate high-quality design with feature brickwork and a balanced appearance. Whilst the proposal is not the chalet style bungalow as was expected by the public under the outline permission, the two-storey design is not considered unacceptable. It is noted that the dwelling is elevated by levels towards the neighbouring properties, in particular to the north. As such the two-storey property would be prominent in the street scene. Although this is noted, the dwelling as viewed from the street scene would not read immediately adjacent to any existing property given the intervening distances, boundary treatments/vegetation and levels. The closest building would be that village hall to the northwest. This building is low key in nature and the proposed dwelling would appear higher and would be visible from this village hall, due to the levels (in which the application site is set higher). Although this is noted, the mix of character sizes in the locality and the separation distance towards this closest property (which is circa 15 metres away over the unmade track) would ensure there is no unacceptable impacts on this part of the street scene. As outlined on the site plan the existing large hedgerow on the north western boundary is to be retained. As such, although the dwelling is elevated in comparison to the surrounding properties, given the distance to the neighbouring properties and boundary treatment, the two storey form would not give rise to unacceptable impacts on the street scene, noting that it would not overly ‘read’ together, in particular from the front of the site. The proposed dwelling is proposed to be constructed of red brickwork walls with clay tiles and the dormer cheeks and gables would be shiplap oak. These materials are considered, in principle, to be acceptable in a rural settlement location. It is considered however reasonable and necessary to request further details of the materials to ensure they are appropriate within the immediate context (see condition 3).

Limited details have been provided in relation to soft (noting that the landscaping plan was not updated following the amended design) and hard landscaping proposed. It is therefore considered reasonable and necessary that a soft landscaping condition (see condition 6), hard landscaping condition (see condition 4), to ensure appropriate landscaping having regard to the site’s location. With these conditions imposed the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impacts upon the character of the street scene and rural area and would accord with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Impact on designated heritage assets Local Authorities are required by Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Area) Act 1990 to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the setting of listed buildings and its setting when considering development proposals that affect the setting or views into it. This is reflected locally within Policy EM11 which has regard to the importance of natural features and spaces that contribute to the character and appearance of a designated asset, such as Listed Buildings. The NPPF (paragraph 202) also requires consideration of whether the proposal would have substantial or less than substantial harm to the special interests of the heritage assets in the public interest. The application site lies within the setting of the nearby Grade II Listed Building of ‘Thatched Cottage’ to the east. Whilst this setting is noted, given the size, design and siting, noting the intervening distance (circa 40m) and mature vegetation, the proposal is not considered to generate any harm to the significance to the nearby Listed Building. The proposal would also be within the setting of the locally listed Newtown Village Hall. In this respect, whilst the rural setting of the application site would be removed by a new dwelling, given the intervening distance over the ROW and the retained strong mature boundary vegetation that is to be remained, the significance of this locally listed building, as a locally designated heritage asset would not be harmed. It is therefore considered, having regard to the points made above, that due regard has been given to the statutory duties set out within Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, as well as the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies EM10 and EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 - 2029 and the Heritage SPD. Impact on neighbouring amenities Policy EM10 (2b) stipulates that development will be permitted where they 'provide a high quality of amenity for occupants of developments and neighbouring properties, having regard to such issues as overlooking, access to natural light and amenity space, in accordance with the Design and Sustainability SPD'.

Occupants of the new dwelling The positioning of openings within the proposed dwelling would result in satisfactory amenity levels for the proposed future occupiers of the dwelling. This is due to the provision of habitable room windows for adequate natural light and outlook in line with Section 10 of the Design and Sustainability SPD.

Principle RA2 within the Design and Sustainability SPD stipulates that for 4 bedroom dwellings they should have a minimum garden size of 60m² and Principle RA3 states that each dwelling must have a minimum garden depth of 10m. In considering Principle RA2 the main amenity area would be in excess of 230m² and the depth of the garden would be 13.5m. As such the amenity area proposed accords with the guidance and is considered acceptable.

Neighbouring amenities The proposed development would be sufficiently located away from any neighbouring dwellings for there to be no harm to their amenities in regards to loss of privacy, loss of light or overbearing effects. Although the dwelling would be sited on a higher level than the immediate surrounding buildings given the distances (21m towards the village hall to the north west, 3 and 4 Castle Cottages circa 44m away to the north and in excess of 40 metres to the dwellings to the east when measuring from building to building) there would be no significantly adverse impacts from the mass and bulk itself, although visible. Consideration has however been afforded towards the new openings. With regard to the proposed front windows, given the orientation and lack of dwellings to the south, no adverse overlooking would be generated towards from these openings. In relation to the side elevations the ground floor openings would have views onto the boundary treatments and is acceptable. The first-floor openings would have views above the boundary treatments however are bathrooms and thus with a condition imposed to control that these windows are obscure glazed there would be no adverse overlooking of loss of privacy to any neighbouring units. Finally, consideration has been afforded towards the rear elevation windows which would have views towards the neighbouring properties to the north as well as some oblique views to the east and west. Concern has been raised through the public observations in this regard. In this respect whilst noted that the proposal would give rise to additional overlooking and loss of privacy than is currently experienced, given the intervening distances between the properties no objection is raised in this regard. The distances between the first floor of the proposal and the dwellings to the north would be circa 47 metres and at ground floor level the distance between the dwellings would be circa 44 metres. Under the Design and Sustainability SPD Key Principle RA6 states that “minimum back to back distances will be required as follows subject to the flexibility set out in paragraph 10.11: 2 storeys – 20 metres 3 storeys – 28 metres” Under paragraph 10.11 it does outline under a) that where there is a change in levels between buildings, then back to back distances may have to be increased. Although this is noted 47/44 metres is considered significantly above the criteria under Key Principle RA6 and the 47/44 metre intervening distance would accommodate the level difference between the sites as to not give rise to any unacceptable loss of privacy or overlooking as to justify refusal of planning permission. The proposed development is therefore considered not to give rise to any significantly adverse impacts upon neighbouring amenities and would accord with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan in this regard.

Parking and Highways Policy CN9 of the Local Plan encourages developments to seek to minimise the need to travel, promote opportunities for sustainable transport modes, improve accessibility to services and support a transition to a low carbon future. As part of the policy, proposals will be permitted where they:

provide safe and suitable access for all potential users;

provide an on-site movement layout compatible for all potential users with appropriate parking and servicing provision; and

do not compromise highway safety of result in inappropriate traffic generation. This is also reflected within Policy EM10 (2e) which outlines that development must provide appropriate parking provision (including bicycle storage) in terms of amount, design, layout and location, in accordance with the adopted parking standards (the Parking Supplementary Planning Document).

Traffic generation The proposed development as a residential property is a traffic generating use with the creation of an additional dwelling intensifying the number of vehicular movements along the local highway network from the construction phase onwards. The scale of the development (namely one dwelling) is not considered to create an overriding material impact upon the free flow of traffic and highway safety.

Access and Impact on the Public Right of Way (PROW)

The proposed access to the new dwelling would be situated off an unmade track which leads onto the Public Right of Way (ROW) (footpath number which currently serves dwelling of Mulberry House and is also a Public Right of Way (ROW), footpath numbers 170/25/1 (to the west of the unmade track) and 170/26/2 (to the east of the unmade track). As highlighted in the Planning Statement submitted with the application, the access to the site is to be moved to the north (actually more western) as to minimise the extent of hard surfacing within the root protection area of an existing oak tree on site. The access point would be made onto an unmade track and would be in close proximity to the junction and corner to the west. In considering this access, the unmade single-track nature would mean that the speed of vehicles would not be high in the locality. Whilst the access point is not considered desirable given the nature of the unmade track and noting that the existing access is actually in a similar location, no significantly adverse highway safety concerns are considered to be generated as to justify refusing planning permission. The existing (similar) access was also considered acceptable under the previous extant permission and agreed by the Planning Inspector. Hampshire County Council Highways, have raised no comment to the application/access, and have referred to their Standing Advice. Concern has been raised by the public observations over the use of this unmade track from both the construction vehicles as well as from vehicles visiting the site whereby parking may be sought outside of the residential land. In this respect, it is considered reasonable and necessary to impose a construction method statement condition in the interests of highway safety. In particular to ensure that materials are stored on site and

that an appropriate level of parking is allowed for on site. It has also been outlined through observations that any damage to the unmade track must be made good by the applicant. This cannot be controlled by the Local Planning Authority and will be a civil matter between the applicant and the owners of the track. In considering the Public Right of Way (in particular to the west), the access point is not actually made onto this ROW, however it is noted that vehicles (construction and occupants) would use the ROW for access. In this regard these tracks are already used for vehicular access due to the number of dwellings in the locality, and given the nature of the unmade track, as above, no high speeds would be able to occur. As such it is considered on balance the proposal would not give rise to any unacceptable impacts upon the ROW users safety as to warrant recommending refusal of the application. It is however considered reasonable to impose some informatives reminding the applicant about the ROW. Notwithstanding this, and the previous approval, Hampshire County Council rights of way team have been consulted as well as the Ramblers, and their consultation response is awaited. The recommendation for this application is therefore approval subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report as well as no new material considerations being raised by the two consultations. As such with the informatives, the proposal is considered to accord with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Local Plan.

Parking arrangements

The proposed development involves the provision of a new four bedroomed dwelling at the site. As outlined within the Parking SPD a 4+ bedroomed dwelling in a rural area should provide three vehicular parking spaces. In this respect, three vehicular parking spaces are proposed on site and are in accordance with the 2.7m by 5.2m dimensions as outlined within the SPD. It is noted that the vehicular parking spaces are tight in nature however given the paved driveway area it is considered that there would be available space for a dwelling to turn on site to leave in a forward manner, albeit would involve a number of manoeuvres. As such the parking spaces proposed are considered acceptable. In accordance with the Parking SPD, four bedroomed dwellings should provide long term storage 3 cycles and 1 short term storage. As demonstrated on the submitted plans the long-term storage would be present on site through the proposed secure shed. As such it is considered necessary to secure that this provided on site (see condition 11).

Accessibility The site is located within an area that benefits from established public transport. However, the settlement of Newtown in which the application sites within does not benefit from a large number of services and facilities whereby there is a place of worship circa 260m to the north west) and the village hall. There is access to bus stops along Well Street however would involve walking along unlit and unpaved roads. The NPPF (2021) in paragraph 79 does accept that 'where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby'. This acknowledges that there may be the need to travel and it would be reasonable to accept the use of a private car in a rural location. Therefore, given the distance to Newtown and in the wider area Newbury is circa 1.2 miles away the site is not considered wholly unsustainable in terms of location to services and facilities.

Refuse and Recycling Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council operates a kerbside waste collection service. This is operated via wheeled containers which must be left adjacent to the nearest adopted highway for collection on the specified waste collection. In accordance with Appendix 3 of the Design and Sustainability SPD, the proposal should be provided with space for the storage of 1no. 140 litre waste bin, 1no. 240 litre recycling bin and 1no recycling container for glass. The location of storage on site has been demonstrated on the submitted plan to be at the front of the proposed site adjacent to the bike shed. This is considered acceptable as a location for bin storage as long as boundary treatment is proposed to screen the storage area from the public realm (which will be ensured through the discharge of condition process for the boundary treatment details). In the absence of details on a designated collection point, it is however considered reasonable and necessary to secure additional information in this regard by way of condition. In particular given the close siting to a junction (albeit not an adopted highway) there is a need to ensure that the collection point is off the track to not impede on access on the tracks. Trees The application site is located in proximity to a number of trees within the application site. The applicant has submitted a tree survey to support the application, however has only re-submitted the previous survey with the previous layout, and thus does not reflect the current proposal. The survey does not however provide a method statement or tree protection plan which was imposed by condition under the extant permission (by the Planning Inspector). In this regard, given that no category A trees were noted on site, and that there are no Tree Preservation Orders on the trees, it is considered that the protection of the appropriate trees can be controlled by condition. As such with a pre-commencement condition requiring a tree method statement and tree protection plan the proposed development is acceptable in terms of trees in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018). Biodiversity The Local Planning Authority has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have full regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity which extends to being mindful of the legislation that considers protected species and their habitats and to the impact of the development upon sites designated for their ecological interest. These requirements are also reflected within the NPPF (paragraph 175) and Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. In this respect the Council’s Biodiversity Officer considered the scheme under the extant permission whereby an Ecological report was submitted (and re-submitted under the current application). Under the extant permission the Officer raised that subject to the mitigation and enhancement measures being adhered through condition no objection was raised. The Planning Inspector raised no comment in this regard either, and placed this condition on the decision notice for the outline permission. As such subject to this condition being re-imposed, the proposal is considered acceptable and would accord with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan.

Environmental Health

The NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing development from contributing to or being put at risk from unacceptable levels of pollution. Local Plan Policy EM12 also seeks to protect health and the natural environment from polluting effects as a result of existing, historic or nearby land uses and activities. The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) has assessed the current application and has raised no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions.

Land Contamination

The Environmental Health Officer has considered that no formal land contamination report is required from reviewing the scheme. It has been recommended however that a condition is imposed that in the event discoloured and/or odorous soils are encountered during any excavation works; or should any hazardous materials or significant quantities of made ground be found, then all development works shall be stopped and the Local Planning Authority contacted immediately. A scheme of works to investigate the risks and / or the adoption of any required remedial measures be submitted to, agreed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the recommencement of development works. This is considered to be reasonable to impose via an informative rather than a condition and with this informative is considered acceptable in this regard.

Noise It has also been concluded by the Environmental Health Officer that in order to protect neighbouring residents from prolonged disturbance through the construction works that a condition is imposed restricting the hours of construction on site. This is considered reasonable to ensure no adverse noise pollution would occur in unsocial hours, it is also considered that it is necessary to restrict the delivery hours in the same manner to protect the amenities of neighbouring residents (conditions 8 and 9). With the land contamination informative and restriction of hours of construction works and deliveries the proposal is considered acceptable and would accord with Policy EM12 of the Local Plan. Sustainable water use Policy EM9 of the Local Plan sets out a requirement to ensure that water resources within new development are used sustainably through the imposition of a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day. The proposal has not been accompanied by any information demonstrating that such levels of water consumption will be achieved within the development; therefore, a planning condition is to be imposed to secure this standard (see condition 6). It is noted that concern has been raised in this regard by public observations, whereby concern has been raised that this quantity could adversely impact supply to other properties and this quantity when considering the sewage treatment place may adversely discharge water into a drainage channel, pipe or soakaway. Under Policy EM9 the water efficiency standard of 110 litre or less per person per day is standard. Supply matters would fall outside of the remit of assessing planning permissions (whereby separate connection permissions would be required with the water supplier) and drainage will be addressed below.

Drainage and Flood Risk Policy EM7 of the Local Plan requires that a sequential approach is applied to account for all sources of flooding thus directing new development away from areas at highest risk or alternatively demonstrating that development is flood resilient and resistant. This requires taking advice from the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authorities to ensure that risks of flooding are adequately managed, whilst also accounting for future climate change.

Drainage and Flood Risk The Environment Agency Flood Risk Maps position the site as falling within Flood Zone 1 giving the site a low risk of flooding (less than 1 in 1000 annual probability) and considers that the site to be at low risk of surface water flooding. The application site is also not located in any local designations ‘Critical Drainage Area’ or ‘Upstream of a Critical Drainage Area’. As such there is no requirement under Policy EM7 of the Local Plan to provide a Flood Risk Assessment with the application. It is noted however a number of public observations have raised concerns on drainage and flooding due to the level differences on site against the neighbouring properties. This concern has been noted, in particular the level of built form on site would be considerably altered. It is however considered that there is ample space on site to manage surface water drainage within the curtilage of the dwelling (such as the amenity and landscaping areas). As such with a condition recommended that the dwelling shall not be occupied until provision has been made to manage surface water drainage within the curtilage of the dwelling (which indicated on the application form would be way of a soakaway), it is not considered that the development would not suffer from undue flooding or result in an increased flood risk elsewhere in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Local Plan.

Foul drainage and water supply The advice of the Government in relation to non-mains sewage disposal is set out within Paragraphs 20 and 21 of the Planning Practice Guidance: Water supply, wastewater and water quality state that:

"Applications for developments relying on anything other than connection to a public sewage treatment plant should be supported by sufficient information to understand the potential implications for the water environment. When drawing up wastewater treatment proposals for any development, the first presumption is to provide a system of foul drainage discharging into a public sewer to be treated at a public sewage treatment works (those provided and operated by the water and sewerage companies). This should be done in consultation with the sewerage company of the area. The timescales for works to be carried out by the sewerage company do not always fit with development needs. In such cases, local planning authorities will want to consider how new development can be phased, for example so it is not occupied until any necessary improvements to public sewage treatment works have been carried out.

Where a connection to a public sewage treatment plant is not feasible (in terms of cost

and/or practicality) a package sewage treatment plant can be considered. This could

either be adopted in due course by the sewerage company or owned and operated

under a new appointment or variation. The package sewage treatment plant should offer

treatment so that the final discharge from it meets the standards set by the Environment

Agency.

A proposal for a package sewage treatment plant and infrastructure should set out clearly the responsibility and means of operation and management to ensure that the permit is not likely to be infringed in the life of the plant. There may also be effects on amenity and traffic to be considered because of the need for sludge to be removed by tankers."

In this regard it has been acknowledged that the current area does not currently have access to mains sewer and thus it is not practical to request this. Whilst a package sewage treatment plant details have not been submitted to support this application it is considered in principle that this is a practical solution for the site given the lack of a public mains sewer. It is therefore considered that the details of this could be controlled by condition to ensure that the mitigation measures for ensuring no implications to the water environment occur. The condition would allow the Local Planning Authority to review the package sewage treatment proposed and allow the production of a report to ensure that there would be no adverse impacts upon the water environment from this. With regard to the effects on amenity and traffic by tankers, given the ad hoc nature of the tankers, that would be located on existing unmade tracks or within the site itself, there is no significantly adverse impacts in this regard as to justify refusal of planning permission. Noting as well that tankers would be present for other properties in the locality. With this condition the proposal would be acceptable in this regard. Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The required forms have been submitted for CIL contributions to be calculated if applicable. From these forms, it would appear that the development would be CIL liable, but would attract a nil charge in line with the Council's Charging Schedule. Other matters

Pre commencement Conditions

The recommendation proposes pre-commencement planning conditions therefore in accordance with section 100ZA of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Pre-commencement Conditions) Regulations 2018, the Local Planning Authority served notice upon the applicant to seek agreement to the imposition of such conditions. Notice was served and agreed on the 29th July 2021. Planning Balance In considering the planning balance, the principle of new dwellings in the countryside is provided for within the development plan as detailed within Policies SS1 and SS6. However, these policies are out of date and therefore a presumption in favour of sustainable development applies in line with Paragraph 11 of the NPPF. Paragraph 11

states that where relevant policies are considered out of date permission will be granted unless the application of policies in the Framework that protected areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed (i), or any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole (ii). The development would represent sustainable development and would not be within an area considered to be isolated to ensure accordance with paragraphs 79 and 80 of the NPPF. The site is considered to be located within a protected area or has assets of particular importance (Paragraph 11) d) ii)), however as assessed above, there is no harm generated towards this protected asset. Therefore the application is also being assessed against Paragraph 11) d) ii). As assessed previously there would be no significant harm to the landscape character of the area, to residential amenity, the natural environment or highway safety. Whilst the public benefits of a single residential dwelling are limited, there is no clear reason for refusing the proposed development when considered against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole and therefore is being recommended as granted, subject to the conditions set out below. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans: - Location Plan - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/01 Rev A - Site Plan - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/03 Rev E - Proposed Floor Plans - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/04 Rev D - Proposed Elevations - Drawing Number: 2071/PL/05 Rev C

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 No development above damp proof course shall take place until

details/specification of the types and colours of external materials to be used, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 Notwithstanding the approved plans no soft landscaping works shall commence

on site until a scheme of landscaping which shall specify species, planting sizes, spacing and numbers of trees/shrubs to be planted (including replacement trees where appropriate) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works approved shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the building(s) or when the use hereby permitted is commenced. In addition, a maintenance programme detailing all operations to be carried out in order to allow successful establishment

of planting, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the landscaping works. Any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. REASON: Details are required in the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5 Notwithstanding the approved plans no hard landscaping works shall commence

on site until details of the materials to be used for hard and paved surfacing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved surfacing shall be completed before the adjoining buildings are first occupied and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the application and in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until a

technical report and a certification of compliance demonstrating that the development has achieved the water efficiency standard of 110 litres of water per person per day (or less) has been submitted (by an independent and suitably accredited body) to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior to occupation because insufficient information was provided within the application and to improve the overall sustainability of the development, in accordance with Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 Prior to occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, parking provision and

turning areas in accordance with those shown on the approved Site Plan (Drawing Number: 2071/PL/03 Rev E) shall be made within the site and shall be retained thereafter for such purposes. REASON: To ensure adequate on site car parking provision for the approved development in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

8 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays. . REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

10 The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until details of the refuse/recycling collection point(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before occupation or the use commences, whichever is the sooner, and shall be thereafter retained and maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse and recycling collection and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the adjoining highway, in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029

11 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the property has provision within its curtilage for secure cycle parking facilities for 3 long and 1 short stay places. The cycle storage shall thereafter be retained and maintained in perpetuity. REASON: To improve provision for cyclists and discourage the use of the private car wherever possible and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

12 No development, including any site clearance shall take place on site until an

arboricultural method statement is submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The arboricultural method statement shall outline how trees and hedges will be protected during the development; including any engineering solutions deemed appropriate, and shall include an appropriately scaled tree and hedge protection site plan. All arboricultural detailing shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval, and shall be produced in accordance with BS5837 "Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction". No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved arboricultural detailing and any tree protection measures shall be retained for the duration of the construction works. REASON: Details are required to ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

13 Development shall be undertaken in adherence with the biodiversity mitigation

and enhancement measures contained within Chapter 6 Mitigation Recommendations of the Ecology Report by Davidson-Watts Ecology Ltd dated 5/7/2018. REASON: In order to avoid adverse impacts on key species and habitats and deliver net gains for biodiversity in line with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029. In order to prevent adverse impacts on key species (birds, reptiles and amphibians) protected under The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

14 No development shall start on site until a construction method statement has

been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, which shall include:

(a) the provision of facilities for contractor parking are made available on site: (b) the arrangements for deliveries associated with all construction works to be

made on site;

(c) access and egress for plant and machinery; (d) location of temporary site buildings, compounds, construction materials and

plant storage areas; (e) erection of signs warning drivers of the presence of pedestrians and the need to give way, (f) the implementation of a low-speed limit Construction work shall only take place in accordance with the approved method statement. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement in order that the Local Planning Authority can properly consider the effect of the works on the amenity of the locality and in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

15 Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no building, structure or other alteration permitted by Class A; B; E; or F; of Part 1; of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected on the application site. REASON: To prevent the overdevelopment of the site in the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to safeguard the character of the local landscape, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

16 The first floor windows at first floor level on the western side elevation of the

proposed dwelling shall be glazed with obscured glass, to at least the equivalent of Pilkington level 4 standard. The window and glazing shall be installed prior to occupation of the development and shall be permanently maintained in that condition. REASON: To protect the privacy of the adjacent properties and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

17 No development, excluding any site clearance, shall take place on site until full

details of the method of disposal of foul sewage, together with an assessment on impact upon the water environment, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained. REASON: In the absence of sufficient detail accompanying the application and to ensure a satisfactory means of disposal of foul sewage, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029).

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

- seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the

application; - considering the imposition of conditions.

In this instance:

- the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

4. If during development works any contamination of the land is encountered or

suspected then this shall be fully assessed in accordance with the Contaminated Land Guidance for Developers. The developer must contact the Local Planning Authority as soon as possible and any action should be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5. If this development will result in new postal addresses or changes in addresses,

please contact the council's Street Naming and Numbering team on 01256 845539 or email shirley.brewer@basingstoke.gov.uk to commence the process.

Details can be found on the council's website 6. The Council encourages all contractors to be 'Considerate Contractors' when

working in the Borough by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment.

7. The Applicant is reminded that appropriate traffic management should be

maintained along the public right way. The Applicant is made aware of the following:

Nothing connected with the development or its future use should have an adverse effect on the right of way, which must remain available for public use at all times.

Any damage caused to the surface of the public right of way by construction traffic will be required to be restored to the satisfaction of the Countryside Area Access Manager on the completion of the build.

There must be no surface alterations to a public right of way without the consent of Hampshire County Council as Highway Authority. To carry out any such works without this permission would constitute an offence under s131 Highways Act 1980.

No builders or contractor's vehicles, machinery, equipment, materials, scaffolding or anything associated with the works should be left on or near the Footpath so as to obstruct, hinder or provide a hazard to walkers.

All vehicles would be accessing the site via a public Footpath should give way to public users, which could include horse-riders and cyclists, at all times.

Appendix B – Update Paper to the 11 August 2021 Development Control Committee

BASINGSTOKE & DEANE BOROUGH COUNCIL

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 11/08/2021

UPDATE

Item No

Ref No Address Ward Councillor Recommendation

5 21/00544/FUL Land To South West Of Castle Cottages, Newtown Common, Evingar

Cllr Samuel Carr Cllr John Izett Cllr Graham Falconer

Approve

Agenda Page: 234 Officer Presenting: Jemma Cox Parish/Town Council: Tony Webb Objectors: Mrs Pilkington, Mr W Lloyd, Mr J Roskill In Support: Ms K Pfleger Councillor: Councillor John Izett Update Representations Councillor J Izett: "As one of the ward councillors representing Newtown Common in the Evingar ward, I will be supporting residents and the parish council in objecting to this proposal and have requested an opportunity to speak to DC Committee members on Wednesday. My fellow councillors, Falconer and Carr are supportive of my views. My reasons for opposing the application are set out below, however, the purpose of this communication in advance of the meeting is to request that the committee postpones determining this case until after site visits by members have resumed, which I understand may be from next month, so that they can fully appreciate the impact of this proposal on the much loved Locally Listed Newtown Village Hall and also on neighbouring homes. The value of a site visit will be, I hope, highlighted by the grounds in my statement on which I outline my opposing to this application. Decisions by members have permanent and significant consequences for the look, feel and character of small rural hamlets such as Newtown and in this case I submit that only by visiting the site will it be possible for members to fully understand the topography and built form relationships in order to reach fully informed conclusions. A recent appeal decision nearby at White Cottage, permitting a new home within the garden curtilage has caused widespread upset in this community. Photographs of the house under construction are included.

Amongst the grounds for my opposing this application are the following as set out below. However, I would start by making it clear that I accept that the site has permission for a dwelling as a result of the appeal decision of 24th June 2019 (APP/H1705/W/19/3222118). This approved an outline application for a detached chalet bungalow, not the 2 storey 4 bedroom house now in detail before DC. I believe that the inspector's support for a low rise "minor residential development" is not being respected by the detailed application proposed. A larger, taller building on the site will have detrimental impacts on what is effectively the heart of the village. This is compounded by the topography of the area, with this site being a relative high point. A 2 storey house would be both visible and "look down" on the village hall and existing dwellings, 4 Castle Cottages in particular. Photographs are attached but I would submit that only by visiting the site will councillors appreciate fully the potential long term damage. Councillors will understand, I believe, why the setting and architecture of the village hall makes it an Edwardian gem, so loved, used and valued by villagers and why it should be protected for the future while still permitting an appropriate low rise new home that would be better screened from view. It seems to me that our officers do recognise the planning sensitivities and over development risks of allowing this application. The proposed condition restricting Permitted Development rights to control any future development or additions is a case in point. Also, the recommendation to require obscure glazing to certain windows overlooking neighbouring homes. Rejection of this application would be consistent with NPPF Chapter 12 which as councillors will know states that creating high quality buildings and places is fundamental to achieving good planning and development. And as the officer report also highlights, our Local Plan Policy EM1 states that development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area. That seems to me to be a highly relevant planning point in this case." See Appendix 1 for photographs. Report discrepancy On page 250 of the Agenda an error was made whereby Mulberry House was referenced although the correct route numbers were cited. It is confirmed that footpath number 170/25/1 runs to the west of the site and would form the closest route for vehicles to access the public highway to the south. To the east of the access point is an unmade track (not a public right of way) which leads to the Public Right of Way footpath 170/26/2 (which runs north to south) which would also be available for users of this application site to get onto the public highway to the south. Additional Condition 18 Under the drainage and flood risk section of the report it was outlined that a condition is recommended that the dwelling is not occupied until provision has been made to manage surface water drainage within the curtilage of the dwelling. This condition was omitted from the recommendation and therefore is added to the recommendation through this update paper:

18. The dwelling hereby approved shall not be occupied until provision has been made to manage surface water drainage within the curtilage of the dwelling which manages surface water at the existing infiltration rates without increasing flood risk. The drainage system shall be maintained in perpetuity. REASON: To manage water on the site in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

APPENDIX 1 PHOTOGRAPHS REFERRED TO IN COUNCILLOR IZETT’S COMMENTS IN RELATION TO ITEM 5 - 21/00544/FUL – LAND TO SOUTH WEST OF CASTLE COTTAGES, NEWTOWN COMMON

Location plan

Site Plan

Proposed Elevations

Proposed Floor Plans

Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 6

Application no: 21/00811/TDC For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land North East Of Wildermere Haughurst Hill Baughurst Hampshire

Proposal Application for Technical Details Consent for the erection of 1 no. detached dwelling; with associated parking, turning, landscaping, private amenity space and access (following approval of Application No. 20/00607/PIP)

Registered: 9 March 2021 Expiry Date: 28 July 2021

Type of Application:

Technical Details Consent

Case Officer: Bethan Wallington 01256 845361

Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. S Du Plessis

Agent: Mr Mark Pettitt

Ward: Tadley North, Kingsclere and Baughurst

Ward Member(s): Cllr Stuart Frost Cllr Geoff Poland Cllr Ken Rhatigan

Parish: BAUGHURST CP OS Grid Reference: 456991 161943

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposed dwelling would not be situated in an isolated location within the

countryside and the proposal is considered to represent a sustainable form of development. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy SD1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety, subject

to the submission of suitable visibility details, and adequate parking would be provided to serve the development. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

4. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on biodiversity

and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021). Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

5. The proposed development would not result in any adverse impacts to flooding

within Flood Zone 1. As such, the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6. The proposed development would not result in any adverse impacts to trees. As

such, the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

General Comments The application was considered by the Development Control Committee meeting on the 13th August 2021 in accordance with the council’s scheme of delegation due to the number of objections received and the Officer’s recommendation for approval. At that meeting Members resolved to defer the application to undertake a Member’s site viewing to view the site in context and the relationship to the neighbouring property. Assessment There have been no material changes in planning policy since the assessment of the application which was before Members on the 13th August 2021. The assessment and recommendation of the planning application therefore remains as per the Committee report and the Update Paper. The recommendation is for the application to be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out below which are also contained in the report at Appendix A. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans:

- Location Plan (drawing no. 191201-01) - Design Scheme (drawing no. 191207-112 rev B) - Block Plan (drawing no. 191201-110 rev B)

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

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

years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 No development shall commence on site above slab level until details of the types

and colours of external materials to be used have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement above slab level because insufficient information has been submitted with the application in this regard, in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 No development above ground floor slab level shall commence on site until details of hard and soft landscaping have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall be accompanied by the following as a minimum:

Hard landscape details shall include the design, type, position and scale of boundary treatments, boundary treatment materials (including finishes) and hardsurfacing materials and minor artefacts (e.g. furniture, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, external services).

Soft landscape details shall include full planting plans, specification (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate and tree planting. The landscaping scheme shall where reasonably practicable retain and enhance the existing boundary hedgerows.

Ground levels or contours.

Tree planting to include the details of the new tree genus and species with use of native woodland species where appropriate as well as tree sizes and pit rooting details following advice contained within BS:8545: 2014 Trees: From nursery to independence in the landscape - Recommendations;

The specification of tree planting pits together with a method statement for their construction and details of any irrigation or drainage infrastructure, tree root barriers (if necessary) to prevent damage or disruption to any proposed hard surfacing or underground services, drains or other infrastructure (including details of the location of external lighting) sufficient to demonstrate how the development is to be serviced without conflict to tree planting, with allowance for reasonable growth. Where applicable, tree pits shall utilise shared trenches and soil cells to allow adequate rooting area to extend underneath the proposed hard surfacing.

An implementation programme.

A Landscape Management Plan to include detailed long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas to address all operations to be carried out in order to allow successful establishment of planting and the long term maintenance of the landscaping in perpetuity, and including provisions for review at least every five years).

The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of species, size and number as originally approved. REASON: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a high standard of landscape in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document.

5 The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in adherence with

recommendations and procedures stated within Chapter 4 Development Constraints and Recommendations of the Ecological Appraisal by All Ecology dated 3rd March 2020 and the Biodiversity Enhancement Scheme by Fowler Architecture and Planning dated January 2021. REASON: In order to provide precautionary mitigation for protected species including dormice, bats, reptiles and nesting birds in line with Policy EM4 of the

Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. In addition to provide ecological enhancements in order to deliver net gains for biodiversity in line with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6 No development shall commence on site until details of the surface water

drainage system which manages surface water at the site without increasing flood risk elsewhere is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement so that the detailed design of the development can provide adequate provision in regards to surface water flooding in accordance Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 Protective measures, including fencing, ground protection, supervision, working

procedures and special engineering solutions shall be carried out in accordance with the arboricultural details produced by Hearne Arboriculture reference JH/AIA/20/090/Rev4 dated 25th March 2021. REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

8 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, or fitting out, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public or bank holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public or bank holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

10 The developer, within one week of the commencement of development, shall

ensure that there is provision to be made for the parking and turning on site of operatives' and construction vehicles, together with storage on site of construction materials. The provision shall be retained and used for the intended purpose for the duration of the construction period and that area shall not be used for any other purposes other than for the parking and turning of vehicles and storage of construction materials respectively. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

11 The property hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commence, whichever is the sooner, until the vehicle parking area has been constructed and surfaced in accordance with the approved details within the respective plot and that area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than parking, loading and unloading of vehicles. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

12 Within 3 months of the date of commencement a Construction Statement detailing

how the new homes shall meet a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, through a demonstration that this requirement for sustainable water use cannot be achieved on technical or viability grounds. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: In the absence of such details being provided within the planning submission, details are required to ensure that the development delivers a level of sustainable water use in accordance with Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

13 The property hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the approved use

commence, whichever is the sooner, until the property has provision within its curtilage for refuse and recycling storage (prior to disposal), the surface materials from the carriageway to the waste container collection point shall be smooth and shall not hinder the movement of waste containers to the collection vehicle and shall make space to provide 1 number 240ltr refuse Wheelie bin, 1 number 240ltr recycling Wheelie bin and 1 number glass recycling box, and the areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purposes other than the storage (prior to disposal) or the collection of refuse and recycling and shall be thereafter retained and maintained as such. REASON: In the interests of general amenity, to ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse and recycling storage and collection and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the adjoining highway, in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

14 The property hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the properties

respective property has provision within its curtilage for secure cycle parking facilities for 2 long and 1 short stay places. The cycle storage shall thereafter be retained and maintained in perpetuity. REASON: To improve provision for cyclists and discourage the use of the private car wherever possible and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

15 No works pursuant to this permission shall commence until there has been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:-

(a) a desk top study carried out by a competent person documenting all the previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 and 3 and BS10175:2011;

and,

(b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site

and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as being appropriate by the desk study in accordance with BS10175:2011- Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice;

and,

(c) a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed. The scheme must include a timetable of works and site management procedures and the nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and if necessary proposals for future maintenance and monitoring.

Important note: Unless part (a) identifies significant contamination, it may transpire that part (a) is sufficient to satisfy this condition, meaning parts (b) and (c) need not be subsequently carried out. This would need to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

If during any works contamination is encountered which has not been previously identified it should be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. The additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme, agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Contamination Land Guidance at: https://www.gov.uk/contaminated-land, Last accessed October 2019.

REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

16 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until

there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of condition 15(c) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 15(c) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details. Such verification shall comprise; i. as built drawings of the implemented scheme; ii. photographs of the remediation works in progress; iii. Certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free of

contamination. Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 15(c), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

17 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority certificates demonstrating that a) sufficient sampling of imported material has taken place and b) the imported material is free from unacceptable levels of contamination. Sampling should take place in situ at a frequency of 1 per 100m3.

REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

18 No development above slab level shall take place on site until details of electric

vehicle charge points have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the occupation of any of the dwellings affected and shall be thereafter maintained. REASON: To ensure that the development provides opportunities for sustainable transport modes in accordance with Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the Parking SPD and the paragraph 112 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

19 No development shall take place on site until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved statement shall include scaled drawings illustrating the provision for:

The parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles

Loading and unloading of plant and materials

Management of construction traffic and access routes

Storage of plant and materials used in construction the development. REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Planning 2011-2029.

20 The two windows at first floor level on the western elevation of the proposed

dwelling shall be fitted with a high-level opening and glazed with obscured glass, to at least the equivalent of Pilkington level 4 standard. The window and glazing shall be installed prior to occupation of the development and shall be permanently maintained in that condition. REASON: To protect the privacy of the adjacent properties and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

21 No works shall take place on site until a measured survey of the site has been

undertaken and a plan prepared to a scale of not less than 1:500 showing details of existing and intended final ground levels and finished floor levels in relation to a nearby datum point which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To protect the privacy of the occupiers of adjacent properties in accordance Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

seeking further information following receipt of the application;

considering the imposition of conditions and or the completion of a s.106 legal agreement (in accordance with paragraphs 54-58).

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-

planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

4. If this development will result in new postal addresses or changes in addresses,

please contact the council's Street Naming and Numbering team on 01256 845539 or email shirley.brewer@basingstoke.gov.uk to commence the process. Details can be found on the council's website.

Appendix A – Report to the 11 August 2021 Development Control Committee

Cttee: 11 Aug 2021 Item No. 6

Application no: 21/00811/TDC For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land North East Of Wildermere Haughurst Hill Baughurst Hampshire

Proposal Application for Technical Details Consent for the erection of 1 no. detached dwelling; with associated parking, turning, landscaping, private amenity space and access (following approval of Application No. 20/00607/PIP)

Registered: 9 March 2021 Expiry Date: 28 July 2021

Type of Application:

Technical Details Consent

Case Officer: Bethan Wallington 01256 845361

Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. S Du Plessis

Agent: Mr Mark Pettitt

Ward: Tadley North, Kingsclere and Baughurst

Ward Member(s): Cllr Stuart Frost Cllr Geoff Poland Cllr Ken Rhatigan

Parish: BAUGHURST CP OS Grid Reference: 456991 161943

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval 2. The proposed dwelling would not be situated in an isolated location within the

countryside and the proposal is considered to represent a sustainable form of development. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy SD1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety, subject

to the submission of suitable visibility details, and adequate parking would be provided to serve the development. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

4. The proposed development would not cause any adverse impacts on biodiversity

and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021). Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018).

5. The proposed development would not result in any adverse impacts to flooding within Flood Zone 1. As such, the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6. The proposed development would not result in any adverse impacts to trees. As

such, the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

General Comments On 1 June 2018 a new route for obtaining planning permission via an application became available for most small, housing-led developments: an application for permission in principle (PIP) followed by an application for Technical Details Consent (TDC). The requirements of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 apply in that the application is to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. A PIP application was approved 'for 1 dwelling ' in October 2020 under planning reference 20/00607PIP. The current proposals are for technical detailed consent (TDC) in relation to this PIP. A TDC is an application for planning permission that: a) Relates to land in respect of which permission in principle is in force, b) Proposes development all of which falls within the terms of the permission in

principle, and c) Particularises all matters necessary to enable planning permission to be granted

without any reservations of the kind that would apply to outline planning permission. A TDC must be determined in accordance with the PIP unless:

One year has passed since the PIP came into effect; and

Materials circumstances have changed since that time. A TDC must cover the whole of the PIP development. The principle of development cannot be reopened at the TDC stage. Conditions can be attached to a TDC provided they meet the tests. It should also be noted that this application is brought to the Development Control Committee in accordance with the scheme of delegation given the Officer's recommendation for approval and the number of objections received. Planning Policy The site is located outside any Settlement Policy Boundary, therefore countryside policies apply. There is also a Public Right of Way (Baughurst:7) to the east of the site.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 2 (Achieving Sustainable Development) Section 5 (Delivering a sufficient supply of homes) Section 9 (Promoting sustainable transport) Section 11 (Making effective use of land) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 14 (Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption on Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) Policy CN1 (Affordable Housing) Policy CN3 (Housing Mix for Market Housing) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2018 Parking Supplementary Planning Document 2018 Housing Supplementary Planning Document 2018 Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (December 2018) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Description of Site The application site comprises a long rectangular shaped plot of land that tapers in at the rear and extends to approximately 0.12 hectares. The site would utilise the existing access from an unnamed track running south from Haughurst Hill towards Wildermere House. The land at the point of the access slopes downwards to a flat area of land. The plot includes a number of trees and hedging to the front and south west boundary. Proposal The proposal is for Technical Details Consent for the erection of 1 no. detached dwelling; with associated parking, turning, landscaping, private amenity space and access following the approval of Application No. 20/00607/PIP for permission in principle.

The proposed dwelling would measure 8.9m in width, 15.7m in length and rise to a maximum height of 7.6m. The dwelling would appear as a single storey bungalow to the front however due to the change in ground levels appear as two storey at the rear. To accompany the TDC submission the following information was submitted:

Design and Access Statement

Ecological Appraisal

Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Arboricultural Method Statement

Flood Risk Assessment Consultations Baughurst Parish Council: "My Council wish to object to the above application on the following grounds: 1. The proposed ecological report includes the felling of a large ash tree which lies

within the curtilage of another separately owned property 2. Until clarification is made of the situation regarding the erroneous report, and a

further correct application is made, my Council remain in opposition to the application."

Thames Water: No objections. HCC Highways: No objections subject to conditions. HCC Emergency Planning: No objections. Waste Team: No objections. Environmental Health: No objections subject to conditions. Landscape: Requested further information relating to retaining walls, hard surfacing, full planting and any new boundary treatments. Biodiversity: No objections subject to condition. Trees: Concerns raised in respect to removal of trees. Public Observations 24 letters of objection received raising the following concerns (in summary): Principle of development:

The land in question is agricultural land and has previously been subject to an application to change of use for "garden" and refused on appeal.

A dangerous precedent would be set for future applications in this rural area.

The property does not fulfil any planning additional housing needed as it is outside the borough plan and settlement boundary.

The property provides no community benefit.

The proposals would not make a significant contribution to the housing shortage and would only benefit one resident.

The proposal makes the most significant change to the village and does not meet a locally agreed need or clearly identified unmet housing need.

The development does not meet affordable housing in any way.

There are not nearby amenities, shops or bus stops to support the dwelling.

It would not enhance or maintain the vitality of the rural community.

Why would a greenfield site be given permission is brownfield sites are being rejected.

Design/Character of the Area:

The development would not respect the local landscape and will not be sympathetic to its character or visual quality and would impact the sense of open countryside and good views.

The development would be out of character with neighbouring properties being built in 17th and 18th century.

There is a public footpath next to the site therefore it will cause adverse impact on visual amenity.

The area is in the AONB therefore it should not be considered for housing.

The ridge of the dwelling is 1m higher than Shalom therefore the property will dwarf the others in the row.

The drawings show a slate, jerkinhead roof which is inappropriate and starkly contract the neighbouring dwellings. There are no multi-story brick and slate houses on Haughurst Hill.

Neighbour impact:

The new development would remove all Shaloms privacy and block out natural light including obscuring the sunrise from the east. It would also be overbearing to the occupants.

None of the houses in the street overlook each other and the argument that it would add on to the row of houses is not valid as no houses have east facing windows.

The proposed development would impact neighbouring views. Highways:

The access of the site which would be used by the applicants, the adjacent property Squirrels Leap and the proposed new development.

The development could give rise to a minimum of twelve vehicle movements per day from a single access point.

Increasing vehicle traffic is particularly apposite as Haughurst Hill is consistently used by walkers, children/parents on school runs, disabled residents, cyclists and runners.

Haughurst Hill is a single road with limited passing points therefore there are concerns with increased traffic and associated larger vehicles during construction (particularly given the amount of earth removal) and once occupied.

The proposal would block access to Squirrels Leap which uses the same drive.

HCC Highways comments are erroneous as there is an existing blind and dangerous bend; there are three entrances to the dwellings opposite and a public footpath runs immediately adjacent.

Biodiversity:

The proposal would adversely impact the rural feel of the area especially given its proximity to Ashford Hill Woods and Meadows (SSSI) and Great Haughurst Copse (SINC).

The impact on bat/bat boxes, reptile and other animal activity which would be adversely affected by the new development and change of use of land.

The Ecology Appraisal was carried out in November 2020 and states no protected species. It is claimed the Ecologist was on there a few hours and only did a fleeting sweep with binoculars.

Cuckoos, bats, badgers, barn owls, grey heron, lesser spotted woodpeckers, red kites, grey wagtails, adders and grass snakes have been witnessed on the site and in the woodland.

Trees:

The site has already removed trees and the impact on trees in the nearby woodland and the removal of the mature, healthy Ash Tree which is shown to be removed in the Ecology Appraisal (it is argued it does not have Ash die back).

The Tree Survey has many serious errors and residents have contacted the author to prepare a new survey.

Flooding:

The access of the site acts as a run-off to rain water therefore there are concerns with additional flooding/surface water and additional costs to residents associated with this.

The flood report has errors and inadequate reporting such as the natural spring that runs the length of Haughurst Hill. This has been investigated by Thames Water, Southern Water and a Civil Engineer and reported that the spring causes flood water run off.

The report from Thames Water missed out the waste water/sewage line that runs south of the length of Shalom and Wildermere therefore what else has been missed.

The Flood Risk Assessment contains generalities and no credit should be given to this report.

In the winter the road freezes over due to surface water and is impossible for residents to get out of the inclined road therefore cars have to park on the top of the hill.

Other Matters:

Concerns with the integrity of the bank supporting the road given the earth removal proposed.

The impact on broadband connection with the pressure of an additional dwelling.

The impact to Hill View during construction which is exposed to the highway.

The impact to Hill View in terms of loss of light, privacy and impact on solar panels.

The development would cause significant noise pollution during and post construction.

The road is already collapsing close to the proposed site.

Midways is listed and has no foundations and is built on a base of solid, yellow clay that contracts and expands with the weather conditions meaning the house moves. A lower stream runs beneath the house to keep the correct consistency to remain

stable however there are concerns that the dwelling would compromise this.

Inaccuracies on the plans compared to the PIP.

The applicants are trying to unofficially change the use of the land and are reducing biodiversity of plant species and wildlife that should be left unattended.

Relevant Planning History 20/00607/PIP Application for Permission in Principle for

residential development of 1 no. dwelling

GTD 09.10.2020

13/01745/LDEU Application for Certificate of Lawfulness

for continued use of land as residential

land

REF 20.11.2013

Assessment Background A PIP approval was granted on 9th October 2020 where it was considered that given its location, land use and amount of development proposed, permission in principle for one residential unit was considered acceptable for the site. The detailed development proposals are now sought through this TDC application, which has a time limit of three years to be implemented following approval. A certificate of lawfulness was refused and subsequently dismissed on appeal on 6th June 2016 under reference 13/01745/LDEU for the use of the land and further land as residential. This was based on the fact that part of the land was not in residential use and the other part of the land had not yet passed the passage of time to become immune from enforcement action. It should be noted that the appeal did include an enforcement case for the use of the land as residential. As a result, the land in question relating to the application site is considered to be agricultural for the purposes of this application and as the previous PIP application. Principle of development The weight afforded to Local Plan Policy SS1 is reduced in light of the Council's inability to demonstrate 5 years' worth of deliverable sites triggered by paragraph 74 of the NPPF. Notwithstanding this however, the principle of development has been found to accord with these policies and with the guidance set out within the NPPF. As such, the issuing of the PIP established the principle of development as acceptable therefore the comments relating to the acceptability of one house in this location have already been considered under the PIP application and will not be discussed within this report. A detailed assessment of the other pertinent matters, having regard to other relevant policies of the Local Plan is set out below. It is also worth acknowledging that since the determination of the PIP application, the NPPF has been revised as of July 2021. The revisions within the NPPF 2021 have made no material change to the considerations of the application.

Public Safety and Emergency Planning - AWE Aldermaston Policy SS7 of the Local Plan requires that development in the land use planning consultation zones (DEPZ) surrounding AWE Aldermaston be managed in the interests of public safety. The policy stipulates the development will only permitted where the Off Site Nuclear Emergency Plan can accommodate the needs of the population in the event of an emergency. The production of the Off Site Plan is a statutory requirement of the Radiation Emergency Preparedness and Public Information Regulations 2001 and sets out the contingency arrangements for a multi-agency response should a radiation emergency occur at AWE and pose a hazard to the public outside the site boundary. The NPPF additionally stipulates that decision-taking processes should promote public safety and minimise impacts upon human health, and in particular ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The location of the site has triggered consultation with the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) Directorate who have advised that the application can be accommodated within the existing off-site emergency planning arrangements. The site lies in Sector L and is located 1764m from the AWE site boundary. In consultation with the emergency planners at West Berkshire Council and Hampshire County Council on the PIP application, it was considered that due to the site’s distance to the AWE boundary, along with the fact that the site is outside the 5mSv area, the site would be less likely to be subject to urgent evacuation in the event of an emergency. In consultation on the current application, Hampshire County Council has confirmed no adverse comments in line with the PIP application. As such, no objections are raised in this regard and the proposal therefore complies with Policy SS7 of the Local Plan. Impact on the character of the area/ design Policy EM1 states that development will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area concerned and must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected. Policy EM10 states that proposals will be required to respect the local environment, contribute to the streetscene and be visually attractive. EM10 also seeks high quality development across the borough, based upon a robust design-led process and a clear understanding of the local identity and context of development to create successful, inviting places where people want to live, work and enjoy themselves. The application site is situated in Haughurst Hill, a small rural settlement north of Basingstoke, located between Ashford Hill to the west, and Baughurst to the east. It is characterised by its sloping landform, and clustered development pattern which extends along Haughurst Hill Road. The parcel of land is situated to the east of existing linear built form where the development would sit in relation to this row of dwellings. Neighbouring properties also sit to the north of the highway opposite the site. The Landscape Officer has considered the proposals are generally acceptable with regards to the scale and appearance of the dwelling and its relationship to adjacent plots. Furthermore, the proposed site layout is generally acceptable alongside the retention of trees and vegetation which will soften its overall appearance. The positioning and size of the plot is relative to its neighbours and sits at the end of an existing row of dwellings. The proposed dwelling would be sited approximately 3m away from the front elevation of Shalom which is the adjacent property west of the proposed dwelling. Whilst

the dwelling is sited further back from the highway and back from its neighbours, there are examples within the row of dwellings that do not sit on a formal building line such as Wellfield and Oakley Cottage which is positioned seven dwellings to the west, however, are read in the same context given they are in the same row on the south side of Haughurst Hill. As such, the layout and siting of the proposed development is considered acceptable in respect of the impact on the character and appearance of the area and the visual amenity of the nearby footpath (Baughurst 7). With regards to the design of the dwelling, it is acknowledged that the dwelling would appear as a single storey dwelling to the front however change to a two storey dwelling at the rear to make best use of the change of ground levels. Therefore, the dwelling would have a more modest appearance along the streetscene. It is noted that the two storey aspect would be visible to the eastern side however two storey dwellings are prevalent in the village and therefore no objections are raised in this regard. The dwelling would also require retaining walls, part of which are shown on the design scheme, due to the change in ground levels which would be softened by landscaping. It is noted that the Landscape Officer requested further details relating to the retaining walls, hard surfaces, planting and new boundary treatments. These have been requested as part of a condition (see condition 4). It is noted that the ridge height of the dwelling would sit 1m higher than Shalom (to the west) however as the area is sited on a hill, there are many differing ridge heights visible from the application site. Furthermore, its 1m raised height is diminutive and would not result in adverse harm to the character and appearance of the area to warrant refusal of the application. Concerns were raised with the erection of a new build property being out of keeping with the neighbouring properties which are primarily 17th and 18th century including the use of the materials being multi-stock brick with a slate roof. However, there are an array of materials used in the village and age of builds such as painted brickwork (Primrose Cottage), slate roof (Chapel House), new build garage (Rose Cottage), render and slate (Shalom) and thatch (Hill Rise). As a result, the materials are considered acceptable. It is nevertheless recommended that additional details on the materials are secured by way of condition to ensure that they are of a high quality (see condition 3). Overall, the design of the current proposal is acceptable in terms of its proportions, roof design and materials when compared to the size of the plot and its neighbouring properties. It is concluded that the design of the dwelling would be of a size and scale not disproportionate to the site or its surroundings. It is therefore considered the proposed development is acceptable in terms of design and impact on character of the area in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Impact on neighbouring amenities Policy EM10 requires developments to provide high levels of amenity for proposed occupants and neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light. The main two properties impact by the development would be Shalom (previously known as Hill Top) and Hill View. Other properties in the area are screened by these properties and no neighbours lie to the east and south of the site.

Shalom Shalom lies to the west of the application site where the properties would share a side boundary. Objections have been raised in regards to the loss of privacy, light and overbearing nature of the development. The proposed property would be located approximately 3.3m away from the boundary and separated some 7.8m away from the side elevation of Shalom. The development would also extend some 4.6m to the rear of Shalom. Due to the direction of sunlight, it is noted that the development would result in a degree of loss of light in the morning to occur to the side of Shalom and to part of the garden (directly to the rear of the dwelling on its western side), particularly given that Shalom is sited on lower ground levels. However, there is space retained between the properties to alleviate some of this impact in combination with the fact that overshadowing would only occur for part of the morning. As such, for these reasons, it is considered that the loss of light and overshadowing to Shalom would not be detrimental to the amenities of the occupants to warrant refusal of the application. With regards to privacy, the proposed development would include two first floor windows facing Shalom however these would be obscure glazed and fitted with a high-level opening which will be conditioned on the grant of any permission (see condition 20). The first floor rear windows would face directly to the plots garden with only oblique views of Shaloms garden available which is the situation for most dwellings sited in a linear fashion. As such, no objections are raised in respect of loss of privacy or overlooking to Shalom. The new dwelling would add a presence of built form to the occupants of Shalom however given the distance from the boundary and spacing between the dwellings, it is not considered that the development would be overbearing to warrant refusal of the development. The 4.6m projection to the rear of Shalom would be noticeable however it would be constructed with a roof form pitched away from the boundary to soften its impact.

Hill View Hill View is located north west of the application site and is on higher ground levels on the opposite side of the highway therefore no objections are raised in respect of loss of light, overshadowing or being overbearing on the occupants. Two windows would sit in the front elevation of the proposed dwelling serving a bedroom and a study that would face onto the highway however these would not directly overlook Hill View. Furthermore, there are existing hedgerows and proposed landscaping that would mitigate any overlooking. Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would be acceptable in regards to neighbour impact in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan. Residential amenity for future occupiers Policy EM10 requires developments to provide high levels of amenity for proposed occupants and neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light. Design Principle RA2 as set out within the Design and Sustainability SPD requires minimum garden sizes of 1 and 2 bedroomed properties to measure 50 square metres while three bedroomed properties and over to measure 60 square metres, whilst RA3

states that each dwelling must have a minimum garden depth of 10 metres. Key Design Principles RA5 and RA6 seek to ensure that new housing provides suitable levels of privacy. Key Design Principle RA7 of the Design and Sustainability SPD states that new development must provide a suitable, pleasant outlook and level of natural light for both new and neighbouring dwellings. In line with policy and guidance, the proposed dwelling should have a garden size in excess of 60 square metres and a garden depth in excess of 10 metres to accord with the guidance set out in Section 10 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document. The garden size is approximately 244 square metres and has a depth of 26 metres. As such, the proposal would accord with the design guidance in this regard. Highways and Parking Policy CN9 sets out that development should integrate into existing movement networks, provide safe, suitable and convenient access for all users; provide appropriate parking and servicing provision; and should not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safety. Policy EM10 requires developments to provide appropriate parking provision (including bicycle storage), in terms of amount, design, layout and location, in accordance with the adopted parking standards. It is noted concerns have been raised by members of the public relating to the safety of the existing access and the width of the current road in relation to the development and parking and turning on site. These concerns have been addressed below.

Traffic generation The creation of an additional dwelling would intensify the number of vehicular movements along the local highway network from the construction phase onwards. Concerns have been raised regarding the narrow nature of the road, the lack of visibility and also the impacts of construction. This section of Haughurst Hill is on a bend and it is acknowledged that the road is of a narrow width. The Highways Officer has commented on the proposals and raised no objections subject to the submission of a construction method statement. The statement will include parking of site operatives, loading and unloading of plant and materials, management of construction traffic and access routes and the storage of plant and materials. It is considered therefore that this pre-commencement condition would enable the Council to ensure that the construction traffic would not cause any undue harm in terms of highways safety. With regards to the traffic on occupation, the scale of development is for one single dwelling and therefore the additional traffic arising from this dwelling is not considered to cause an unacceptable level of traffic generation to warrant refusal of the application. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that the principle of a dwelling on this site has already been accepted through the granting of the permission in principle. As such, given the scale of the development, it is not considered that the development would create an overriding material impact upon the free flow of traffic and highway safety to warrant refusal of the application and therefore accords with Policy CN9 in this regard.

Access Concerns were raised with the acceptability of the access with is on a steep hill and blind bend leading to lack of visibility. The site already includes an existing access which, given the sites use as agriculture, could see larger vehicles enter and exit the site. As such, given the scale of the development and the existing access, it is not considered

that the development would create an overriding material impact upon highway safety to warrant refusal of the application and therefore accords with Policy CN9 in this regard. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that the principle of a dwelling on this site has already been accepted through the granting of the permission in principle.

Parking The proposed development shows that three bedrooms would be accommodated within the dwelling along with a study which could be used as a single bedroom. In accordance with the Parking SPD, the proposal would generate the need for three car parking spaces for the dwelling. Two parking spaces have been shown on the plan however there could be space for a third parking space on the drive if necessary. The proposal is considered to comply with Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan. The parking spaces are to an acceptable standard in terms of size and with the turning area will enable the vehicles to leave in a forward gear. The dwellings would also need to provide 3 long term and 1 short term secure cycle parking storage, as details of the secure cycle storage has not been submitted with the application this will be controlled by way of condition (see condition 14).

Electrical charging points An EVCP provision is required on site in accordance with the Parking SPD which states that "as a minimum, all new homes should incorporate a suitable-electricity circuit to enable the convenient fitting of a charging point" and that "details of electric vehicle charge points must accompany full and reserved matters planning applications" (para 9.4). As no details in this regard have been submitted with the application this will be controlled by way of condition (see condition 18). Given the above, the proposal would comply with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Local Plan.

Refuse/waste storage and collection As with the existing servicing arrangements for the properties in Haughurst Hill, refuse collection would be kerbside. Although there is adequate space within the plot for the storage of refuse/recycling bins, no details of the waste/recycling collection point has been submitted and will be secured by way of a condition (see condition 13). Biodiversity The Local Planning Authority has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have full regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity which extends to being mindful of the legislation that considers protected species and their habitats and to the impact of the development upon sites designated for their ecological interest. These requirements are also reflected within Policy EM4 of the Local Plan which states that development proposal will only be permitted if significant harm to biodiversity and/or geodiversity resulting from a development can be avoided or, adequately mitigated. It is noted that concerns have been raised in respect of the impact on wildlife, particularly given the sites proximity to the Ashford Hill Woods and Meadows SSSI and Great Haughurst Copse SINC. The Great Haughurst Copse SINC is located some 100m to the

south of the site and the Ashford Hill Woods and Meadows SSSI is some 150m to the east. As a result of this and the intervening properties, the Biodiversity Officer has considered the proposal would have limited/negligible impacts on both the SINC and SSSI. The Biodiversity Officer has provided comments on the application and noted that the main issues of the development relate to preventing impacts on nesting birds and foraging/roosting bats which may be using adjacent woodland. The Landscape Biodiversity and Trees SPD states that a minimum buffer of 20m should be provided between the edge of the development and the woodland however given the presence of the access track that runs along the western edge of the woodland, it is considered on balance acceptable in this instance. The Biodiversity Officer also raised no objections in this regard. It was however noted that the external lighting mitigation recommendations within the Ecology Appraisal need to be followed to prevent impact on bats which will be covered by a condition on the approval. In addition, the Biodiversity Officer noted that if the mature ash over hanging the site is to be affected then further aerial inspections and possible mitigation for bats may be necessary however the ash tree is now proposed to remain therefore no objections are raised in this regard. Due to comments received, the Officer requested clarification from the Biodiversity Officer on a number off issues. The Biodiversity Officer confirmed that impacts on bats should be covered by external lighting strategies that follow recommendations set out by the Bat Conservation trust which are set out within the Ecological Appraisal. At the time of consideration for the PEA the grassland was short and unsuitable for reptiles. Furthermore, there are no on-site habitats that would hold Cuckoo’s, Barn Owls, Grey Herons, Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers, Red Kites or Grey wagtails in anything other than flyover or possibly very limited foraging behaviour. There may be records from the adjacent woodland which is divided from the building by an already present access path. Bat mitigation is catered for in the conditioned Ecological Survey. The site details were dominated by short grassland and thus unsuitable for reptiles. Whilst it is accepted the land has been mowed, with concerns raised in regard to purposely cutting the grass, the Local Planning Authority is unable to prevent land owners cutting grass and this is an activity that can be carried out on land without planning permission. It was also raised that the Ecologist who carried out the survey was only at the site a few hours and used binoculars to assess the site. The concerns are noted however unless there is definitive proof of any malpractice, the Local Planning Authority would not question the validity of the Ecological Report on these grounds. As a result, it is considered that the development not result in any adverse impacts on biodiversity to warrant refusal of the application and the proposal would be in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. Trees Policy EM1 of the Local Plan seeks to provide protection to the landscape character of the borough having regard to visual amenity and scenic quality but also giving consideration to natural features such as trees and hedgerows which also have ecological functions. Concerns were raised with the removal of the Ash Tree which is detailed as T40 in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Scheme. Further concerns were raised with the removal of trees already on the site and the tree survey having errors. It

is noted that some fruit and low amenity trees have been removed on the site however these are not protected by a TPO and therefore can be removed without consent from the Council. The application was initially submitted with a Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Scheme that proposed to remove the Ash Tree, however, this has since been amended to retain the tree therefore the objection raised in this respect has now been overcome by its retention. Furthermore, concerns with the validity of the survey have also been rectified with the amended version. The Tree Survey shows that the two category B trees would be removed as part of the development (T14 birch and T15 lime). The Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD outlines that the removal of such trees is only justified where the need for development in this location outweighs their loss and adequate mitigation can be provided. As noted within the PIP application, the proposal makes a small contribution to housing stock which is needed in the borough due to the shortage in housing land supply. It is therefore considered that the need for the dwelling outweighs the loss of the two trees. A condition has however been imposed requested appropriate replacement planting to mitigate the loss of the trees (see condition 7). No further comments have been received by the Tree Officer since the submission of the amended document. However, the tree protection plan shows that all foundations would be located outside the root protection areas (other than those to be removed). Tree protection fencing will also be installed to protect the trees during construction. Whilst no comments have been received from the Tree Officer, the submitted documents appear to show that sufficient measures have been taken to protect the trees. Therefore, the development is considered in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan. Flood risk Policy EM7 states the triggers for a Flood Risk Assessment are:

All sites of 1ha or more in Flood Zone 1;

All sites in Flood Zone 2 or 3;

Sites that have a record of localised or groundwater flooding from SFRA;

Sites in critical drainage areas and upstream of critical drainage areas. The policy continues to states 'all planning applications for major development are required to ensure that sustainable drainage systems are used for the management of surface water unless demonstrated to be inappropriate. All new development in areas of risk of flooding must give priority to the use of sustainable drainage systems'. There have been objections raised in respect surface water drainage and flooding and that the access to the site acts as a run off to the stream further south of the site. In addition, residents raised concerns with the errors and inadequate reporting in the Flood Risk Assessment such as the natural spring that runs the length of Haughurst Hill which causes flood water run-off. Concerns were also raised with the additional costs to residents to associated with the additional pressure on flooding however costs incurred to residents is not a material planning consideration. The proposal is for a minor development on a site extending to 0.12ha, within Flood Zone 1 - a low probability of flooding whereby in most cases the proposal does not trigger the need for a Flood Risk Assessment or Surface Water Drainage Scheme.

However, the application has been accompanied with a Flood Risk Assessment given the concerns raised within the PIP application. The application site is raised from a natural stream which lies 110m to the south of the site running east to west. There is also another stream some 170m to the west of the site that runs north to south down the hill. Given the site is raised from the stream to the south, any run-off would run southwards into this watercourse. Thames Water has raised no objections to the proposal in respect of surface water drainage providing that the developer follows the sequential approach to the disposal of water. As concerns have been raised with regards to surface water drainage, it is considered reasonable to impose a condition to ensure that the proposal minimises surface water drainage from the site and does not further impact neighbouring properties. This is considered reasonable and necessary to approve the application whereby details will be requested prior to the commencement of development (see condition 6). Thames Water further raised no objections in respect of waste water network and sewage treatment works as the scale of development would not materially affect the sewer network although noted that care need to be taken when designing new networks to ensure they do not surcharge and cause flooding. It was noted there were some sewer lines close/crossing the site therefore Thames Water noted that it is important to minimise the risk of damage. It is worth noting that Building Regulations and the Water Industry Act 1991 would have to be complied with following the granting of planning permission which deal with much of the matters raised in objections. Therefore, given that consideration has been given to surface water drainage with the imposition of a condition, it is considered that the development complies with Policy EM7 of the Local Plan and the concerns raised would not warrant refusal of a single dwelling in this location. Environmental Health The NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing development from contributing to or being put at risk from unacceptable levels of pollution. Local Plan Policy EM12 also seeks to protect health and the natural environment from polluting effects as a result of existing, historic or nearby land uses and activities. The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) has assessed the current application and has raised no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions relating to restrictions on construction and delivery hours (see Conditions 8 and 9).

Contaminated Land Policy EM12 establishes that development will only be permitted where it does not result in pollution which is detrimental to quality of life or poses unacceptable risk to health or the natural environment. Given the historic agricultural use of the site, a land-use which Environmental Health considers to be potentially contaminating, the Environmental Health Officer is of the view that the ground on the site has the potential to be contaminated. The Environmental Health Officer has therefore requested that full land contamination assessments are

submitted prior to the commencement of the development are undertaken followed by a remediation method statement (condition 15). In addition, verification reports and topsoil sampling are required prior to occupation to evidence the findings (conditions 16 and 17). This is considered necessary and reasonable to include this as a condition, if the development had otherwise been acceptable in other respects. Sustainable water use Policy EM9 of the Local Plan sets out that development for new homes will need to meet a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day, unless clear demonstration is given that this would not be feasible. It is considered appropriate that this requirement be secured by way of an appropriate condition (see condition 12) Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The required forms have been submitted for CIL contributions to be calculated if applicable. From these forms, it would appear that the development would be CIL liable, but would attract a £nil charge in line with the Council's Charging Schedule. Other matters A number of other objections were raised which will be listed and discussed separately below.

Why would a greenfield site be given permission if brownfield sites are being rejected?

Every application is based on its own merits on a case by case basis. The principle of development was considered acceptable under the PIP application and this application is to consider the technical details as mentioned above.

The impact on the stability of Midways which is listed and has no foundations

Midways is situated some 60m away where there are four dwellings intervening the application site from this property. The objections raised from the occupier of this property has not submitted any evidence to suggest that the construction of this development would impact the stability and structure of the Grade II listed property. In terms of determining the application, this is not a matter on which the application could be refused.

Concerns with the integrity of the bank supporting the road given the earth removal proposed and impact to Hill View being exposed to construction.

The proposal would have to comply with Building Regulations in order to ensure the construction of the build is safe and secure. This is not a matter to warrant refusal of the planning application. Retaining walls are being constructed around the site for stability.

The impact on broadband connection with the pressure of an additional dwelling.

It is not considered that the addition of one single dwelling would add significant pressure on the broadband connection in the area. This is not a reason that would warrant refusal of the planning application.

The impact to Hill View on their solar panels. Hill View is raised from the application site therefore it is not considered that the solar panels would be demonstrably impacted by the proposed development which would sit as a single storey dwelling to the front.

The development would cause significant noise pollution during and post construction.

It is noted that the construction phase would cause some disruption during the development however this would only be for a limited period of time. Conditions are proposed relating to working and delivery hours to respect the amenities of neighbours (see conditions 8 and 9). It is also noted that noise could be generated from garden activities and vehicular movements, however, the dwelling would sit adjacent to other neighbouring properties where similar activities would be carried out. As such, it is considered that the proposal would not cause an unacceptable level of pollution or impact to health and well-being to warrant refusal of the application.

Inaccuracies on the plans compared to the PIP The plans submitted for the PIP application were indicative therefore as the design of the build has progressed, the siting of the dwelling has been altered. Siting was not approved as part of the PIP application. Pre-Commencement Conditions The recommendation proposes pre-commencement planning conditions therefore in accordance with section 100ZA of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Pre-commencement Conditions) Regulations 2018, the Local Planning Authority served notice upon the applicant to seek agreement to the imposition of such conditions. Notice was served on the 22nd July 2021 and confirmation of the conditions were agreed on 28th July 2021. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans:

Location Plan (drawing no. 191201-01) Design Scheme (drawing no. 191207-112 rev B) Block Plan (drawing no. 191201-110 rev B)

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. 2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3

years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 No development shall commence on site above slab level until details of the types

and colours of external materials to be used have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement above slab level because

insufficient information has been submitted with the application in this regard, in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 No development above ground floor slab level shall commence on site until

details of hard and soft landscaping have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall be accompanied by the following as a minimum:

Hard landscape details shall include the design, type, position and scale of boundary treatments, boundary treatment materials (including finishes) and hardsurfacing materials and minor artefacts (e.g. furniture, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, external services).

Soft landscape details shall include full planting plans, specification (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate and tree planting. The landscaping scheme shall where reasonably practicable retain and enhance the existing boundary hedgerows.

Ground levels or contours.

Tree planting to include the details of the new tree genus and species with use of native woodland species where appropriate as well as tree sizes and pit rooting details following advice contained within BS:8545: 2014 Trees: From nursery to independence in the landscape - Recommendations;

The specification of tree planting pits together with a method statement for their construction and details of any irrigation or drainage infrastructure, tree root barriers (if necessary) to prevent damage or disruption to any proposed hard surfacing or underground services, drains or other infrastructure (including details of the location of external lighting) sufficient to demonstrate how the development is to be serviced without conflict to tree planting, with allowance for reasonable growth. Where applicable, tree pits shall utilise shared trenches and soil cells to allow adequate rooting area to extend underneath the proposed hard surfacing.

An implementation programme.

A Landscape Management Plan to include detailed long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas to address all operations to be carried out in order to allow successful establishment of planting and the long term maintenance of the landscaping in perpetuity, and including provisions for review at least every five years).

The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of species, size and number as originally approved. REASON: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a high standard of landscape in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document.

5 The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in adherence with recommendations and procedures stated within Chapter 4 Development Constraints and Recommendations of the Ecological Appraisal by All Ecology dated 3rd March 2020 and the Biodiversity Enhancement Scheme by Fowler Architecture and Planning dated January 2021. REASON: In order to provide precautionary mitigation for protected species including dormice, bats, reptiles and nesting birds in line with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. In addition to provide ecological enhancements in order to deliver net gains for biodiversity in line with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6 No development shall commence on site until details of the surface water

drainage system which manages surface water at the site without increasing flood risk elsewhere is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement so that the detailed design of the development can provide adequate provision in regards to surface water flooding in accordance Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 Protective measures, including fencing, ground protection, supervision, working

procedures and special engineering solutions shall be carried out in accordance with the arboricultural details produced by Hearne Arboriculture reference JH/AIA/20/090/Rev4 dated 25th March 2021. REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

8 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, or fitting out, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public or bank holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public or bank holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

10 The developer, within one week of the commencement of development, shall

ensure that there is provision to be made for the parking and turning on site of operatives' and construction vehicles, together with storage on site of construction materials. The provision shall be retained and used for the intended purpose for the duration of the construction period and that area shall not be used for any other purposes other than for the parking and turning of vehicles and storage of

construction materials respectively. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

11 The property hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commence,

whichever is the sooner, until the vehicle parking area has been constructed and surfaced in accordance with the approved details within the respective plot and that area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than parking, loading and unloading of vehicles. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

12 Within 3 months of the date of commencement a Construction Statement detailing

how the new homes shall meet a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, through a demonstration that this requirement for sustainable water use cannot be achieved on technical or viability grounds. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: In the absence of such details being provided within the planning submission, details are required to ensure that the development delivers a level of sustainable water use in accordance with Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

13 The property hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the approved use

commence, whichever is the sooner, until the property has provision within its curtilage for refuse and recycling storage (prior to disposal), the surface materials from the carriageway to the waste container collection point shall be smooth and shall not hinder the movement of waste containers to the collection vehicle and shall make space to provide 1 number 240ltr refuse Wheelie bin, 1 number 240ltr recycling Wheelie bin and 1 number glass recycling box, and the areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purposes other than the storage (prior to disposal) or the collection of refuse and recycling and shall be thereafter retained and maintained as such. REASON: In the interests of general amenity, to ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse and recycling storage and collection and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the adjoining highway, in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

14 The property hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the properties

respective property has provision within its curtilage for secure cycle parking facilities for 2 long and 1 short stay places. The cycle storage shall thereafter be retained and maintained in perpetuity. REASON: To improve provision for cyclists and discourage the use of the private car wherever possible and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

15 No works pursuant to this permission shall commence until there has been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:-

(a) a desk top study carried out by a competent person documenting all the previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 and 3

and BS10175:2011;

and,

(b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as being appropriate by the desk study in accordance with BS10175:2011- Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice;

and,

(c) a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed. The scheme must include a timetable of works and site management procedures and the nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and if necessary proposals for future maintenance and monitoring.

Important note: Unless part (a) identifies significant contamination, it may transpire that part (a) is sufficient to satisfy this condition, meaning parts (b) and (c) need not be subsequently carried out. This would need to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

If during any works contamination is encountered which has not been previously identified it should be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. The additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme, agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's 'Model Contamination Land Guidance at: https://www.gov.uk/contaminated-land, Last accessed October 2019.

REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

16 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until

there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of condition 15(c) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 15(c) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details. Such verification shall comprise;

iv. as built drawings of the implemented scheme; v. photographs of the remediation works in progress; vi. Certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free of

contamination.

Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 15(c), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029

17 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until

there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority certificates demonstrating that a) sufficient sampling of imported material has taken place and b) the imported material is free from unacceptable levels of contamination. Sampling should take place in situ at a frequency of 1 per 100m3.

REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

18 No development above slab level shall take place on site until details of electric

vehicle charge points have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the occupation of any of the dwellings affected and shall be thereafter maintained. REASON: To ensure that the development provides opportunities for sustainable transport modes in accordance with Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the Parking SPD and the paragraph 112 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

19 No development shall take place on site until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved statement shall include scaled drawings illustrating the provision for:

The parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles

Loading and unloading of plant and materials

Management of construction traffic and access routes

Storage of plant and materials used in construction the development. REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Planning 2011-2029.

20 The two windows at first floor level on the western elevation of the proposed

dwelling shall be fitted with a high-level opening and glazed with obscured glass, to at least the equivalent of Pilkington level 4 standard. The window and glazing shall be installed prior to occupation of the development and shall be permanently maintained in that condition. REASON: To protect the privacy of the adjacent properties and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

21 No works shall take place on site until a measured survey of the site has been

undertaken and a plan prepared to a scale of not less than 1:500 showing details of existing and intended final ground levels and finished floor levels in relation to a nearby datum point which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To protect the privacy of the occupiers of adjacent properties in accordance Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

seeking further information following receipt of the application;

considering the imposition of conditions and or the completion of a s.106 legal agreement (in accordance with paragraphs 54-58).

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the

need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

4. If this development will result in new postal addresses or changes in addresses,

please contact the council's Street Naming and Numbering team on 01256 845539 or email shirley.brewer@basingstoke.gov.uk to commence the process. Details can be found on the council's website.

Appendix B – Update Paper to the 11 August 2021 Development Control Committee

BASINGSTOKE & DEANE BOROUGH COUNCIL

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 11/08/2021

UPDATE

Item No

Ref No Address Ward Councillor Recommendation

8 21/00811/TDC Land North East Of Wildermere, Haughurst Hill, Baughurst Tadley North, Kingsclere and Baughurst

Cllr Stuart Frost Cllr Geoff Poland Cllr Ken Rhatigan

Approve

Agenda Page: 303 Officer Presenting: Lisa Souden Objectors: Mr A Jackson In Support: Mark Pettitt Councillor: Councillor Poland Update Additional submission from third party Photographs have been submitted from a third party to indicatively show the additional height and depth the proposed dwelling would be in comparison to Shalom. The impact on neighbouring properties including Shalom has been addressed within the Officer’s report and the photographs do not alter the conclusion already reached in this regard. Landscape Proposals The Landscape Plan shows the intended trees to be removed and the retention of some existing features such as the landscaping to the front of the site, the hedge to the west and some trees to the rear of the site. New landscaping includes a number of trees to the western boundary and rear of the site along with a new hedgerow to the eastern boundary. Details of the retaining walls have been submitted showing the existing and new ground levels proposed either side of these retaining walls. The retaining walls would not be stark features and are largely covered by earth works and landscaping. The Landscape Officer has reviewed the submitted details and considered these acceptable. As such, no objections are raised in this regard. However, the details submitted to date have not satisfied all aspects of the suggested landscaping condition (condition 4) which remains to be attached to any decision notice should permission be granted.

Response to Third Party Representations The applicant has submitted supporting information from their consultant team to answer some of the queries raised by third party comments with regard to the content, accuracy and approach of the original submission/supporting documents, in respect of groundwater, ecology and tree matters. Whilst this information seeks to provide clarification in these areas for third parties, it does not provide new material information, and does not alter the conclusions reached within the Officer’s report in respect of these matters and does not alter the overall recommendation of approval.

Location plan

Proposed Site Plan

Street Scene

Proposed Elevations

Proposed Floor Plans

Cttee: 8 Sept 2021 Item No. 7

Application no: 21/01095/ROC For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address The Gamekeepers Tunworth Road Mapledurwell Basingstoke

Proposal Variation of condition 1 of 19/01351/FUL to amend plan numbers to allow for change from tarmac to gravel parking area

Registered: 27 April 2021 Expiry Date: 22 June 2021

Type of Application:

Removal/Variation of Condition (Sec 73)

Case Officer: Phillip Richards 01256 845314

Applicant: The Gamekeepers Agent: Mr M Runcie

Ward: Basing and Upton Grey

Ward Member(s): Cllr Onnalee Cubitt Cllr Sven Godesen Cllr Mark Ruffell

Parish: MAPLEDURWELL AND UP NATELY CP

OS Grid Reference: 468685 151390

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval

1. The development would be of an appropriate design and relate to surrounding development and would not result in significant impacts on the local landscape character or scenic quality of the area. As such the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The proposed development would preserve the character and setting of the Mapledurwell Conservation Area. Having due regard to Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3. The development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue

overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such accords with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety and

adequate parking would be provided to serve the development and as such the proposal complies with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

General comments The application has been brought to the Development Control Committee due to the number of objections received and the Officer's recommendation for approval. Planning Policy The site lies outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary and is positioned within the Mapledurwell Conservation Area. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2021) Section 2 (Achieving Sustainable Development) Section 4 (Decision-making) Section 5 (Delivering a sufficient supply of homes) Section 6 (Building a strong, competitive economy) Section 9 (Promoting sustainable transport) Section 11 (Making effective use of land) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Section 15 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Section 16 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption on Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy SS6 (New Housing in the Countryside) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (The Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Parking Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (March 2018) Heritage Supplementary Planning Document (March 2019) Housing Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018) Mapledurwell Conservation Area Appraisal (2003) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment) Regulations 2015 Section 72 of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

Description of Site Tunworth Road is characterised by a mixture of dwelling types, from chalet-style bungalows to larger two storey dwellings and thatched cottages. These properties are typically sited towards the front or middle of linear plots, with varying land levels and topographical characteristics of Tunworth Road. There is a mixture of ridge heights within the surrounding streetscene and there tends to be clusters of built form followed by verdant gaps between the properties. The application site comprises a car park which is used in association with The Gamekeepers Public House and adjacent residential development. The car park is laid to hardstanding and enclosed by a boundary hedge and trees along the western boundary with post and wire fencing around the remainder of the site. The proposed development granted permission under 19/01351/FUL is partially complete which related to the erection of 2 no. 3-bed semi-detached cottages and associated parking and the formation of a replacement car park to serve the Public House. A garage is also under construction serving these dwellings. Proposal This application seeks the variation of Condition 1 (approved plans) attached to the planning permission granted under 19/01351/FUL to allow for the substitution of a new site layout plan that would allow for the change of materials of the car park area from tarmac to gravel. This application is retrospective whereby the gravel has already been laid. Consultations Historic Environment Team: No objection. Environmental Health Officer: No objection. Public Observations Five letters of objection have been received and are summarised as follows:

The gravelled car park would be and is very noisy.

The noise will be more pronounced when the pub is fully open.

Loose gravel and closer vehicular movements adjacent to existing properties makes significantly more noise than the old hardstanding.

Harm to residential amenity of properties adjacent to the Gamekeepers.

Noise pollution.

Tarmac is preferred.

Currently unapproved extension to the approved car park area in place.

The driveway is now used by all delivery lorries and vans as well as pub staff and customers to access the pub car park and extends past 11pm.

The noise is as bad as the emptying of glass bottles subject of previous noise complaints and restriction orders at the site.

Additional noise pollution within the quiet countryside and Conservation Area.

Owner continues to disregard planning regulations.

Relevant Planning History

13/00303/FUL Erection of single storey outbuilding to rear

of Public House

Granted 07.08.2013

19/01351/FUL Erection of 2 no. 3-bed semi-detached

cottages and associated parking.

Formation of replacement car park to serve

public house.

Granted 13.09.2019

20/00901/FUL

Erection of a detached double garage Refused

Allowed at

appeal

29.07.2020

18.01.2021

21/01777/RET Laying of hardstanding to provide access

to the cesspit for the pump-out lorry and to

enable the dray lorry to make deliveries

clear of the highway; the hardstanding also

to serve as additional parking to serve The

Gamekeepers; provision of 7 No. low-level,

bat-friendly downlighters within the

landscaped margin.

Pending Consideration

Assessment This application is made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary conditions imposed upon a decision already granted planning permission by the Local Planning Authority. Section 73 of the Act instructs the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to consider the variation to, or relief of conditions that are applied for, stating that, "if the [the LPA] decide that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions differing from those subject to which the previous permission was granted…..they shall grant permission accordingly" (s.73(1)(a)). As such the LPA can grant permission unconditionally or subject to different conditions, or alternatively refuse the application if it is deemed that the original condition(s) should remain in place. Where an application under Section 73 is granted, the effect is the issue of a new planning permission, sitting alongside the original permission. The original permission remains intact and un-amended. As such, the Section 73 application is tantamount to a new planning permission. In this case, planning permission has been granted for the erection of 2 no. three bedroom dwellings. This Section 73 application seeks to only amend the car park material from tarmac to gravel, but the development itself (being for the erection of 2no. three-bedroom dwellings) remains unchanged. It is acknowledged that the amendments sought would alter the visual appearance of the finished car park, but the substantive nature of the development is nevertheless considered to be the same as previously proposed. It should be noted that this revised car park application is separate from the pending car park extension application under 21/01777/RET at the site. The proposal is therefore considered to constitute a 'minor material' amendment when having regard to national planning guidance, where its scale and/or nature results in a development which is not substantially different from the one which has been approved. A judgement on "materiality" in any particular case is one of fact and degree, along with

taking into account the likely impact of the amendment on the local environment. This is the case for all planning applications. Materiality is considered against the development as a whole, not just part of it. The basis for forming a judgement on materiality is always the original planning permission. Principle of Development The principle of development was approved under 19/01351/FUL which was the original approval for the ‘Erection of 2 no. 3-bed semi-detached cottages and associated parking. Formation of replacement car park to serve public house’ at the site. This application seeks approval for the variation of condition 1 (approved plans) only attached to planning permission granted under 19/01351/FUL in order to allow for the substitution of new plans which would allow for the change to the materials (apart from approximately 15 metres of the access from Tunworth Road) of the car park from tarmac to gravel. The focus of this assessment will be whether the proposal gives rise to any adverse harm. Impact on the character of the area Policy EM1 states that development will be permitted only where it can be demonstrated that the proposals are sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area concerned and must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected. Of additional relevance is Policy EM10 which states that proposals will be required to respect the local environment, contribute to the streetscene and be visually attractive. Policy EM10 also seeks high quality development across the borough, based upon a robust design-led process and a clear understanding of the local identity and context of development to create successful, inviting places where people want to live, work and enjoy themselves. The proposed alterations to the car park area would be readily apparent and visually contrast from what was previously approved, however it is considered that the change to gravel would be more informal and better placed given the rural location of the site and a somewhat more traditional choice of material typically used in car parking areas of public houses within rural locations. It is considered that the proposed changes, as part of this application would be integrated successfully within the appearance of the site when also considering the incorporation of the garage (as approved at appeal). It is considered that the proposed amendments would not have any significant or detrimental impacts upon the streetscene or character of the area above that which has been previously approved. As such, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of design and materials given the previous permission in place and no objections are raised in visual amenity terms. Therefore, subject to the conditions set out below, it is considered that the development would create an acceptable form of development and accord with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Impact upon the Mapledurwell Conservation Area Local Planning Authorities have a statutory duty under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to have special regard to preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a Conservation Area when considering planning applications. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of the heritage asset, great weight should be given to the conservation of the asset (paragraph 199) in

the public interest. This requirement is reflected locally within Policy EM11 of the Local Plan. In this instance, the heritage asset for which impact upon significance requires consideration is the Mapledurwell Conservation Area for which the application site lies within. Whilst the proposal would result in physical visual change, the resultant development would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and not harm the ability to appreciate the significance of the heritage asset. The Historic Environment Team has also raised no objection to the proposal. As such, having regard to the requirements of Section 72 of the 1990 Act, it is considered that the proposal would accord with the NPPF, Policy EM11 of the Local Plan, the Mapledurwell Conservation Area Appraisal and the principles of the Heritage SPD. Archaeology The application site is situated within a Yellow Archaeological Buffer Zone, however as the application relates only to a change of materials to the car park, it is considered that the proposal would not give rise to harm in this regard. The location of the proposal is shown upon the historical Tithe maps (1841) as a site where buildings previously stood. No objections were raised with regards to the previously proposed development but an archaeological monitoring condition was recommended and imposed. Given this previous condition on the original application, it is considered this should be replicated with this permission (see Condition 10). As such, it is considered that the proposal would accord with Policy EM11 of the Local Plan. Residential Amenity Policy EM10 2b) requires development to provide a high quality of amenity for occupants of developments as well as the neighbouring properties. Design Principle RA2 as set out within the Design and Sustainability SPD requires minimum garden sizes of three bedroom or more properties to measure 60 square metres, whilst RA3 states that each dwelling must have a minimum garden depth of 10 metres. The current proposal would not alter the residential amenity from the previously approved scheme. Each habitable room of the proposed dwellings contain a window which would provide pleasant outlooks for the future occupiers. There would also appear to be ample storage space marked out within the dwellings. The development would provide rear amenity space in excess of the standards set out in the Design and Sustainability SPD. As such it is considered that the proposed dwellings would be provided a suitably high standard of accommodation for the future occupiers in accordance with Policy EM10. The proposal comprising the erection of the two dwellings, is not considered to result in demonstrable neighbouring amenity impacts. The dwellings would not result in significant overshadowing, overlooking or overbearing impacts towards the neighbouring occupiers therefore the levels of amenities currently enjoyed by those occupiers would not be unduly compromised.

Noise Policy EM12 states development will be permitted provided that it does not result in pollution which is detrimental to quality of life or poses unacceptable risks to health or the natural environment. Pollution is defined as anything that affects the quality of land, air, water or soil, which might lead to an adverse impact on human health, the natural environment or general amenity. Pollution can arise from a range of emissions, including smoke, fumes, gases, dust, steam, odour, noise and light. Objection has been received to the noise impacts generated by the change of materials from tarmac to gravel. In considering the proposal, it is accepted that there would be a level of noise generated by the gravel therefore the Environmental Health team have been consulted. In response, it has been indicated that the use of gravel would not lead to a statutory noise nuisance and therefore no objection has been raised. As such it is not considered that the gravel would result in such overriding demonstrable levels of harm to human health or the environment as to substantiate a refusal. As such, it is considered that the development would create an acceptable form of development and accord with Policies EM10 2b) and EM12 of the Local Plan. Impact on Highways Policy CN9 sets out that development should integrate into existing movement networks, provide safe, suitable and convenient access for all users, provide appropriate parking and servicing provision and should not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safety. Policy EM10 requires developments to provide appropriate parking provision (including bicycle storage) in terms of amount, design, layout and location, in accordance with the adopted parking standards. The proposed change of material to the car park would not result in any adverse impacts in highway safety terms. The proposal would not alter the currently approved access nor reduce the number of parking spaces and as such it is considered that the proposal would not have a material impact on the operation of the local highway network. The proposed gravel would be situated approximately 15 metres from the highway edge which is considered to be sufficient to help minimise any gravel being brought onto the highway. No objections are raised in this regard and the development therefore accords with Policies CN9 and EM10 in regard to these matters. Trees Whilst the proposed change of materials for the car park areas would not in of itself lead to the removal of trees from the site, following the Officer site visit it was noted that several trees that were proposed to be retained as part of the previous application have been removed. This includes three trees along the northern boundary (a Wild Cheery, Common Hawthorn and Common Ash) and a Cider Gum tree from the middle of the site which contributed to the character of this site within the Conservation Area. The loss of these trees has impacted upon the character of the site making the appearance to the rear of the public house more open and increasing the proportion of hardstanding. However, from the street scene, the site has an enclosed character following the construction of the two dwellings along the frontage which mitigates the appearance of this loss to the public domain to glimpsed views only. Overall, in planning terms, the loss of the trees would not be demonstrable to the character of the wider area.

Sustainable Water Use and Energy Efficiency Policy EM9 of the Local Plan sets out a requirement to ensure that water resources within new development are used sustainably through the imposition of a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day. No information has been submitted in regard to the proposed dwellings water use as part of this application, however details were submitted and agreed with regards to the previous application 19/01351/FUL. As such, subject to works being carried out in accordance with the approved detail, no objection is raised (see condition 7). Policy EM10 of the Local Plan sets out that development should provide buildings which are able to respond to environmental change and which minimise energy consumption through sustainable approaches to design. Attention has been brought to this requirement by way of a planning informative. Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. The CiL payment with regards to the previous application 19/01351/FUL has been made, therefore as no GIA increase under the current application, there wouldn’t be any further levy required in this instance. Planning Balance and Conclusion The proposal would continue to provide two new family dwellings within a sustainable rural community through the provision of appropriately scaled, sited and designed dwellings. The principle of development remains acceptable having regard to para 11(d) and footnote 7 when balancing the impact on heritage assets. There would be no significant impact as a result of the alterations to the car park materials and the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the Mapledurwell Conservation Area as well as retaining the ability to appreciate its significance and matters such as highways and parking have all been appropriately provided for. The development whilst providing no long-term economic development would result in economic benefits both through the construction phase and then by future resident expenditure within the local economy. The development would contribute towards the provision of new homes, which the government seeks to significantly boost. The social role of the development comprises of the provision of two dwellings at a time when the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5-year housing supply position. The previous permission also secured new landscaping which would continue to be secured. On this basis, it is considered the proposal is acceptable. As such, the development should be approved subject to the conditions set out below. Other matters

Conditions The grant of a planning permission under Section 73 enables the Local Planning Authority to impose planning conditions that are deemed appropriate and meet the relevant tests as cited within the NPPF (2021) (paragraph 57). Given that the application provides a new planning permission, it is considered necessary and reasonable to continue to impose conditions that remain relevant to the continuation of the development on site, having regard to details secured under permission 19/01351/FUL.

Conditions have been renumbered and reworded to reflect the variation to condition 1 as necessary with the omission of any tree protection requirements as previously secured given that the trees have been removed from site. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

plans approved under application 19/01351/FUL and the following amended details:

Site Plan (Drawing No.P02 Rev E)

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

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

years from the date of the planning permission granted under reference 19/01351/FUL. REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

dwellings hereby permitted shall be those as approved under this application and Condition 3 attached to planning permission 19/01351/FUL and approved under discharge of condition submission ref: 19/03428/CONDN on 2nd February 2021. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 The development hereby approved shall be carried out in full accordance with the

tree planting scheme approved under reference 19/03428/CONDN with regard to Condition 6 attached to planning permission 19/01351/FUL. REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to increase the tree coverage and ensure the establishment of trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

5 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised public holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 - 2029.

6 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place between 0730-0900 or between 1700-1800 Monday to Friday or before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 The development hereby approved shall be carried out in full accordance with the water efficiency calculation details approved under reference 19/03428/CONDN with regard to Condition 9 attached to planning permission 19/01351/FUL. REASON: To ensure that the development delivers a level of sustainable water use in accordance with Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

8 The development hereby approved shall be carried out in full accordance with the

boundary treatment details approved under reference 19/03428/CONDN on 2nd February 2021 with regard to Condition 10 attached to planning permission 19/01351/FUL. REASON: To ensure preservation of the character and appearance of the area in accordance with the guidance contained within Section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the approved use

commence, whichever is the sooner, until the properties has provision within its curtilage for refuse and recycling storage (prior to disposal) with a collection point not more than 15 metres carrying distance from a highway which is a carriageway. The surface materials from the carriageway to the waste container collection point shall be smooth and shall not hinder the movement of waste containers to the collection vehicle, and have been provided for 1 number 240ltr refuse Wheelie bin, 1 number 240ltr recycling Wheelie bin and 1 number glass recycling box, and the areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purposes other than the storage (prior to disposal) or the collection of refuse and recycling and shall be thereafter retained and maintained. REASON: In the interests of general amenity, to ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse and recycling storage and collection and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the adjoining highway, in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029.

10 The developer shall afford access at all times to an archaeological organisation

nominated by Hampshire County Council Archaeologist, and shall allow them to observe the excavations and record archaeological evidence that may be uncovered as a result of the development. In the event that significant remains are discovered the applicant should provide sufficient opportunity for their investigation which may delay works in progress. REASON: To allow for the recording of items of archaeological interest in accordance with Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

11 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the use commence,

whichever is the sooner, until vehicle parking spaces have been constructed, surfaced and marked out in accordance with the approved details and that area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than parking, loading and unloading of vehicles. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £116 or £34 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and creative manner:-

seeking further information following receipt of the application;

considering the imposition of conditions

In this instance:

the application was acceptable as submitted and no further assistance was required.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The Borough Council declared a Climate Emergency during 2019 formally making

this declaration at the meeting of Cabinet in September 2019. This recognises the need to take urgent action to reduce both the emissions of the Council's own activities as a service provider but also those of the wider borough. In this respect, the Council is working with consultants at present to identify appropriate actions to achieve the targets that have been set. Beyond the requirements of any conditions that may be applicable to this planning permission and the current planning policy framework, the applicant is encouraged to explore all opportunities for implementing the development in a way that minimises impact on climate change. Where this in itself might require separate permission applicants can contact the council for advice through the following link: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/before-making-a-

planning-application. For information more generally on the Climate Emergency please visit: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/climateemergency.

4. If this development will result in new postal addresses or changes in addresses,

please contact the council's Street Naming and Numbering team on 01256 845539 or email shirley.brewer@basingstoke.gov.uk to commence the process. Details can be found on the council's website.

Location Plan

(Submitted to application 19/01351/FUL)

Site Plan