major application cttee: 7 august item no. 1 2019 ... · two letter of representation received...

Major Application Cttee: 7 August 2019

Item No. 1

Application no: 18/03729/RES

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land Between Elmdene And Fairholme Aldermaston Road Pamber End Hampshire

Proposal Reserved matters application for 11 no. dwellings including appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, pursuant to outline permission 15/03029/OUT

Registered: 10 January 2019 Expiry Date: 9 August 2019

Type of Application:

Approval of reserved matters

Case Officer: Russell Stock 01256 845244

Applicant: Pamber Place Ltd Agent: Mr Stephen Young

Ward: Pamber And Silchester

Ward Member(s): Cllr Simon Mahaffey Cllr Roger Gardiner

Parish: PAMBER CP OS Grid Reference: 461045 158630

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

Reasons for Approval 1. The development would provide for an appropriate layout, scale, mass and

design which would integrate with its surroundings and the semi-rural character of the area. The development would have due regard to the character and appearance of the area and would not result in harm to the visual amenity of the streetscene. The proposal would therefore comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The proposed development would provide an appropriate internal layout with adequate parking provision in accordance with highway requirements, and as such would accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019); Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

3. The proposal would not result in any adverse harm to the amenities of neighbouring properties. The proposal would therefore accord with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. The proposed development would provide high quality amenities for future residents in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning

http://planning.basingstoke.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=%5eND,KEYVAL.DCAPPL;

Document (2018). General comments 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 application site is located outside of a Settlement Policy Boundary and therefore lies within a countryside location. Part of the site also falls within a Mineral Safeguarding Area. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (February 2019) 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) Section 17 (Facilitating the sustainable use of minerals) National 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 CN3 (Housing Mix for Market Housing) Policy CN6 (Infrastructure) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM5 (Green Infrastructure) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (The Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan 2013 Policy 15 (Safeguarding – Mineral Resources)

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability SPD (2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (2018) Housing SPD (2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD (2018) Parking Standards SPD (2018) Heritage SPD (2019) Hampshire County Council Minerals and Waste Safeguarding in Hampshire SPD (2016) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990 Description of Site The application site relates to a 0.98ha rectangular parcel of agricultural land to the west of the Aldermaston Road (A340) in the hamlet of Pamber End. The site occupies land that is part of a larger agricultural field to the west. To the north and south on both sides off the A340, lie existing dwellings along with commercial premises located opposite (Elm Park Garden Centre). The site is bounded by mature trees and hedgerows and three sides (north, south and east). The western boundary of the site is currently open, with agricultural land beyond. The site is generally flat and level and covered with grass. The site is crossed by overhead power cables, connected to pylons outside of the application site boundary. These cables are positioned to the northern portion of the site. At its lowest point, the cable is approximately 12m above ground level. Proposal This application seeks approval of the reserved matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) pursuant to outline permission 15/03029/OUT which granted permission for up to 12 dwellings, approving the principle of development and access (vehicular and pedestrian) to the site. Application 15/03029/OUT was subject to a Section 106 legal agreement which secured Affordable Housing and on site Public Open Space. This application is for 11 semi-detached and detached dwellings, four of which would be affordable homes. The proposed mix would comprise:

2 Bedroomed 3 Bedroomed 4 Bedroomed 5 Bedroomed

Market Housing

1 2 2 2

Affordable Housing

3 1 0 0

The proposals also include areas of Pubic Open Space and Habitat Enhancement Area. The proposed materials include red brick, hanging tile, clay tile and slate. Amended plans were received on the 8th May 2019. These included the following changes: - Plots 2-5 separated into semi-detached dwellings - enlarged gardens for Plots 2-5 - resitting of dwellings - alterations to garage locations - revised Plot 1 house type - design alterations to Plot 8 - additional and relocated visitor parking spaces - inclusion to Habitat Enhancement Area - amended and enlarged parking areas - repositioned bin collection points Further amended plans were received on the 18th July 2019. These included the following changes: - Plot 1 updated elevations - site plan updated to show correct roof forms - garage door sizes increased to 2.3m in height from 2.1m - additional vehicular parking spaces added to units 2-7 - brick walls added Further amended plans were received on the 24th July 2019. These included the following changes: - enlarged parking spaces for two plots Consultations Parish Council: - “Reserved matters application for 11 no. dwellings including appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, pursuant to outline permission 15/03029/OUT Land between Elmdene and Fairholme, Aldermaston Road, Pamber End A meeting was held on 23rd January to obtain residents views on the application. The views were summarised in a report provided by Cllr Hale and Cllr Greaves. This report was considered by the Parish Council and it was agreed to respond on the layout and design with the following requests:- 1. A row of native hedgerows and trees should be planted along the west side of the development and TPOs (tree protection orders) placed on all existing trees on the site. 2. There is concern about the potential for flooding on the site as it has flooded many times over the years. The Council request that a SUDS( sustainable drainage systems) survey is carried out and appropriate steps , such as ditch clearance, are undertaken to prevent future flooding. 3. A condition should be put on the designated play area to ensure that it can’t be used for any other purpose in the future.

4. Pedestrian access should be along the roadway into the development rather than a separate entrance. There is concern that a new footpath could kill the roots off the adjacent mature oak tree. 5. Lighting should be provided for safety but this should unobtrusive to residents. 6. Access to the pavement along the A340 should be maintained during the construction phase of this development. 7. Access to the site during the construction phase should be via the A340 only and deliveries should be restricted to only between the hours of 9am and 3pm to minimise the impact on work and school traffic. 8. The Parish Council are concerned about the proposed entrance to the development and would suggest that a ghost island junction as shown in chapter 8, figure 8/2 of Part 6 TD42/95 would provide a safe layout for both the entrance to the new development and at the same time be a solution to the Elm Park Garden Centre entrance. As a benefit the refuge just to the north of the new entrance could be placed in the centre of the new junction. The Council recognises that such a junction layout requires additional, minimal highway widening but with the projected increase in traffic on the A340 due to known development in the area there would be an increased risk of accidents if this type of junction is not provided. The Parish Council would also like to ask the following questions:- Will the low cost housing on the site be adopted by a Housing Association? Will the road into the development be adopted by the Highways Authority? Who will be responsible for maintaining the public open spaces ? Will the payment of CIL/Section 106 be looked at again in the light of changes to legislation since the development was first approved?” Environmental Health Officer: - No comment. Housing Officer: - No objection. Tree Officer: - Objection, further information required. Policy Officer: - Policy CN3 not adequately justified (housing mix of market dwellings). Biodiversity Officer: - No objection. Public Open Space Officer: - No objection. Landscape Officer: - Initial – Further information required. Final – No objection. Waste Officer: - Amendments required. Hampshire County Council Highway Officer: - No objection.

Public Observations Thirteen letters of representation received objecting to the proposals, as summarised below:

The A340 is a dangerous road and any new access onto this road would make the existing situation worse.

The road and surrounding footpaths are poorly maintained. The speed limit is rarely adhered to.

A roundabout at the sites access would slow traffic on the A340. Further traffic calming measures required, including reducing the speed limit, introduction of speed bumps, speed cameras, additional signage and traffic lights etc.

Site is susceptible to flooding, drainage ditches should be provided and subsequently well maintained.

Health and safety concerns for children playing underneath power lines.

Landscaping works should be carried out.

Public Open Space would be used in the future for additional development access.

The development may result in the loss of important trees. The existing trees should be protected.

The affordable housing appears cramped.

Hours and means of construction should be conditioned.

The development is at a scale which is out of keeping with the small village.

Adverse impact on neighbouring properties.

Proposed footpath should be relocated as to avoid impact on neighbours.

The development sets a precedent for further development in the locality.

The proposed affordable housing is set within uncharacteristically small plots. It is also located within close proximity to audible electric pylons/lines.

Street lighting would be uncharacteristic. Two Letter of representation received commenting on the proposals, as summarised below:

Traffic calming measures of the A340 are required.

Local infrastructure would not cope with any additional development.

10 Swift nest bricks should be conditioned in order to provide net gain for biodiversity.

Relevant Planning History 15/03029/OUT Outline application for the erection of up to 12 no.

dwellings together with the creation of a new vehicle and pedestrian access to the A340

Granted 25.05.2016

Assessment Housing Land Supply The NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to identify a five year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. In addition, and in line with the Housing Delivery Test published in February 2019, a 20% buffer should be added to

the borough’s supply. 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 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 only locations where this position would not apply is in parishes with recently made Neighbourhood Plans that allocate land for housing. The parishes with this extra protection are Whitchurch, until the end of September 2019, and Kingsclere until October 2020. In this instance, the site falls outside of these areas. Principle of development Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must 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. 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. This is a reserved matters application and principle of residential development for up to 12 dwellings, along with access to the site was accepted under outline application 15/03029/OUT which was granted on the 25.05.2016. The main planning consideration is therefore whether the proposed housing development as set out in the Reserved Matters submission gives rise to a form of development appropriate in layout, scale, appearance, landscaping, and is in accordance with the requirements of the approved outline planning application. Vehicle and pedestrian access to the site from the Aldermaston Road (A340), was considered acceptable as part of the outline permission. Layout The proposed layout, whilst not identical to that indicatively shown as part of the outline submission, remains broadly similar. The internal access road would run from the northern part of the site, from the approved access, in a southerly direction ending in a turning head in front of Plot 11. Whilst differing from the surrounding development, where properties have their own separate access onto the highway, the linier pattern of development characteristic of Pamber End would be reflected. While the proposed dwellings would not front directly onto the A340, they would front the internal access road in a similar fashion. Dwellings would front onto the area of Public Open Space, ensuring that this area is subject to a degree of natural surveillance, assisting in creating a welcoming and safe place for the public to enjoy.

- Housing Mix

Policy CN3 requires that where developments contain market housing, these should contain a range of house types and sizes to address local requirements, with the mix to be appropriate to the size, location, density and character of the site and surrounding area. The policy also requires that the mix is supported by evidence to justify the proposed housing mix. Securing a mix of homes will enable the borough’s needs to be met, whilst also helping to create mixed and balanced communities. Communities that contain a good mix of homes have greater potential to support a range of local services and facilities including shops, schools and community buildings. They are also likely to be home to people of all ages, resulting in activity in the street at all times of the day, increasing the potential for social interaction. The NPPF requires Local planning Authorities to plan and provide for a mix of housing, based upon current and future demographic trends, including identifying the size, type, tenure and range of housing that is required, and reflecting local demand. Further information about local requirements is set out in Chapter 3 of the Housing SPD. This identifies a particular borough-wide need for small family homes and homes suitable for people wishing to downsize. Principle 3.1 states that ‘Development should therefore principally focus upon a mix of two and three bedroom dwellings (particularly houses), with only a limited requirement for homes with four bedrooms or more, which should normally comprise no more than 30% of the market homes in the development’. The proposals seeks to provide a market mix of properties consisting of one 2 bedroomed dwelling, two 3 bedroomed dwellings, two 4 bedroomed dwellings and two 5 bedroomed dwellings. This equates to a 57% provision of properties with four or more bedrooms. Concerns were initially raised by the Case Officer as no justification for the proposed mix of dwellings had been received. Following this, the applicant submitted their views regarding this issue in a letter dated 08 May 2019. In summary, this states:

Housing Needs Assessment for adjacent application (18/00858/OUT) identified a need for units of all sizes (not just smaller units, as cited by the case officer).

BDBC’s Rural Housing Study (2009) indicates a need for dwellings of all sizes in the rural area.

Housing mix was considered at the time of the outline application (2015) and found to be acceptable.

Mix would be in keeping with the character of the area. The Housing SPD identifies a borough-wide need for smaller homes but identifies ‘that different housing mixes will be appropriate in different locations’ (para 3.10). The SPD is clear that deviations should be justified. A Housing Needs Assessment was submitted as part of a planning application 18/00858/OUT on an adjacent site (land within the same ownership/same applicant). The appeal statement by ARC4 (para 4.10) concludes,

‘It can reasonably be concluded that the local area supply has little diversity and can be shown that there is a mismatch between supply and local need. The HNS 2017 demonstrates that whilst there is some requirement for large homes, the need is mainly from downsizers and newly forming households. This is exactly the scenario described in the council’s SHMA’.

The approach in the SPD supports a range of dwelling sizes, including some larger homes. It is considered that the conclusions of the HNA on this adjacent site support the SPD’s focus upon providing smaller dwellings, rather than the larger homes proposed by the applicant’s submission. As the applicant notes, the rural housing study is an old piece of evidence (2009). Notwithstanding the LPA’s concerns about the material weight it should carry, the applicant’s own quote above supports the SPD’s focus on smaller units. The applicant’s 8th May 2019 letter quotes (from RHS para 7.7.3) that, ‘The majority of the overall demand in North and Tadley was for 3-bed properties (47.3%) followed by 4+ bed units at 31.1%’. The requirement for 4-bed+ units cited in this document, closely aligns with the expected level of 30% in the SPD, and is at odds with the proposal. As part of the outline application, the housing mix was annotated onto the illustrative site plan. At this time the proposal was for ‘up to 12 units’ (rather than the 11 currently proposed) and there was no indication of each unit’s tenure – so it was not possible to discern the precise market housing mix. In any case, this plan was not an approved document. The illustrative layout plan included 4 no. 2-bed units, 2 no. 3 bedroom units, 4 no. 4-bedroom units and 2 no. 4/5 bed units. The Design and Access Statement (DAS) does not specify a housing mix, but includes the same layout as is shown on this site plan (and identifies the size parameters of the proposed dwellings). Contrary to the applicant’s assertion, the mix does not therefore appear to be established in an approved document. Nonetheless, housing mix was considered in general terms by the case officer. The proposed mix was considered against the mix policy relevant at that time (which required a % of smaller units), and it was recognised that some flexibility would be necessary, however it did not accept a specific alternative mix. The Housing SPD which was adopted by the Council in 2018 is a material consideration in the determination of this application. Policy CN3 (c) states that the mix of market housing should be ‘appropriate to the established character and density of the neighbourhood’. It is noted that the case officer for the outline planning application acknowledged that the ‘prevailing character of the area is of large detached dwellings within generous plots’, and that, ‘therefore a degree of flexibility must be adopted in both meeting policy requirements and bringing forward a form of development that is appropriate to the surrounding area’. The latter quote related to the housing mix policy requirements in force at the time (which required a % of smaller units), and it does

not necessarily follow that the current policy requirements would need to be flexed to achieve a development that would be appropriate to the character of the area. Whilst the prevailing character is noted, it is considered that through good design, a housing mix according with policy and guidance could be achieved. It is not considered that this matter would suitably justify the proposed departure from the relevant guidance. The proposals therefore have not been supported by an adequate justification demonstrating why in this instance, not according with guidance would be acceptable. As such, the development would not accord with Policy CN3 in this regard. This matter weighs against the development, further discussion of this is had within the planning balance section below. Along with Policy CN3’s requirement for such an appropriate mix, an obligation to provide 15% of the dwellings as being accessible and adaptable is included. Such requirements can normally be met through compliance with M4(2) of Building Regulations (accessible and adaptable dwellings) (or a subsequent government standard), which allows dwellings to be easily converted to a wheelchair standard at a future date dependent upon the occupant’s future need. Guidance contained within the Design and Accessibility SPD states that on larger sites, the accessible and adaptable homes should be sited in the most accessible locations, in order that residents with care needs have easy access to community facilities and public transport links. Details of the two units (one market and one affordable) which are to accord with the accessible and adaptable standards can be secured via appropriate conditions. Plans received on the 24th July 2019 show enlarged parking space for Plot 6 in this regard.

- Affordable Housing Affordable housing provision is a corporate priority for the Council as set out in the Council Plan 2016 - 2020 to ensure that those households in need are able to access housing in the borough. Local Plan Policy CN1 requires the provision of 40% affordable housing as part of new residential development with a tenure split of 70% rented and 30% intermediate products. Policy CN1 continues by stating that ‘in seeking affordable housing provision, the council will have regard to the current viability of developments…’. The completed Section 106 agreement attached to the approved outline application 15/03029/OUT sets out a requirement that the development will provide 40% affordable housing with 25% social rented and 15% shared ownership units. In considering the 11 units proposed, a 40% provision would equate to four affordable units as set out within the Section 106. Additionally in accordance with Policy CN1, the four affordable homes on site should include three for rent and one for intermediate tenure. At least one affordable home would also be required to meet enhanced accessibility or adaptability standards. In this instance, the on-site provision of four affordable homes would accord with the requirements of the outline permission and Section 106. Additionally, the 70/30 split between rented and intermediate forms would accord with the requirements of the Section 106 and Policy CN1.

Continued compliance with the Section 106 agreement is required, including the need to enter into an agreement with a registered provider. A condition ensuring that at least one of the affordable properties is built out in accordance with the adaptable and accessible standards is necessary, in accordance with Policy CN1. It has been indicated that Plot 5 would fulfil this requirement, with an amended site plan showing an enlarged parking space for this dwelling.

- 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. 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 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 127 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 130 states that permission should be refused for development of poor design which fails to take opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area, taking into account local design standards or guidance contained with SPDs. As discussed above the layout is similar to the indicative design produced at the outline stage and although different to the prevailing surrounding character it is not considered to be objectionable as a principle, subject to consideration of the details of the layout.

- Residential Amenity 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 outline permission had conditions imposed in relation to ground contamination/mitigation and verification. Policy EM10 2b) requires development to provide a high quality of amenity for occupants of developments. Design principle RA2 as set out within the Design and Sustainability SPD required that garden sizes of one and two bedroomed properties should measure 50 square metres, with three bedroomed or more properties requiring 60 square metres. Whilst design principle RA3 states that each dwelling

must have a minimum garden depth of 10 metres. Design principle RA7 requires that new development provide suitable, pleasant outlooks and levels of natural light. Each of the proposed dwellings habitable rooms would be provided with windows that enable suitable outlooks. The proposed dwellings would also afford future residents with appropriate levels of privacy and natural light. Garden depths of at least 17m would be provided for each dwelling. Additionally, garden areas of 130m2 or more would be provided for each property. In addition, an on-site area of open space would also be provided. No objections are therefore raised in this regard. In order to protect the amenities for future residents of Plot 8, it is necessary to place a condition ensuring that the stairway window within the south elevation of Plot 7 be obscurely glazed. Similarly, the en-suite bathrooms of plots 9 and 10 should also be obscurely glazed in order to protect neighbouring amenities. A condition will be added in this regard. Subject to the above noted conditions, the development is considered to provide a suitable level of amenity for future occupiers of the dwellings in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan and the guidance contained within the Design and Sustainability SPD.

- 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. 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. Plots 1 and 11, given their positioning within the site, would have the greatest potential to impact upon neighbouring properties. Plot 1 would be sited to the south of Fairholme and its garden, it would be 5m from this neighbours boundary and approximately 8.5m from the rear of the dwelling itself. Whilst this dwelling would undoubtedly represent a visual change for this neighbouring property, given these distances, it would not result in any harmful overbearing implications. Additionally, whilst to the south of Fairholme, it is not considered that a reason for refusal based on loss of light could be substantiated. Plot 1 has been designed in a way which would limit overlooking. A single first floor window would be sited in the buildings north elevation, however this would serve a bathroom and would be obscurely glazed. A condition securing this detail is necessary. A rooflight would be located within the north-facing roofslope of bedroom 1 of this plot, in order to ensure that direct view towards Fairholme cannot be achieved by this opening, a condition securing further details, including a section demonstrating that it is at a height of 1.7m is necessary in order to protect neighbouring privacy. Plot 11 would be sited 7.8m from the boundary of the neighbouring property Elmdene, which is located to the south of the site. There would also be a 14m degree in separation between the dwelling within Plot 11 and Elmdene itself. In light

of such distances, it is considered that there would be no harmful overbearing impacts. In regards to loss of light or overshadowing, as this dwelling would be sited to the north at the above distances, there would be no harmful impact upon this neighbour in this regard. The rear elevation of the dwelling within Plot 11 angles towards the northwest part of Elmdene’s rear garden. The first floor rear facing windows within the dwelling closest to this neighbour would serve an en-suite and dressing room, both of which could be obscurely glazed. Bedroom 5/study would have a window which affords views from it, however given its orientation, the distance to the neighbouring property and the less sensitive nature of the neighbours garden in this location, there would be no harmful loss of privacy. In addition, the existing boundary treatment in this location is to be retained which would further mitigate any potential views towards neighbouring properties. It is considered that the other windows within the rear elevation of this dwelling would not have an adverse impact upon neighbouring properties. No other impacts on any other neighbouring property are considered to result in harmful impacts. The development is therefore considered to appropriately protect the amenities of surrounding properties and accords with the requirements of Policy EM10 of the Local Plan and the guidance contained within the Design and Sustainability SPD.

- Highways, Parking, Refuse and recycling 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. Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site was previously approved under the outline permission. Consideration has therefore been given to the proposed internal layout, taking into account the relevant standards in relation to vehicular and cycle parking, manoeuvring and waste storage/collection provision. The application site falls within a ‘rural’ location as defined by Table 1: Residential Parking Standards set out within the Parking SPD. This requires two and three bedroomed dwellings to provide 3 parking spaces each within their respective curtilages. Four bedroomed properties or greater are required to provide 4 spaces. These spaces should accord with the dimensional requirements set out within Table A of the Parking SPD. This seeks to ensure that adequate space is provided for parking in order to avoid disruption to the highway network. For example, unconfined spaces within the curtilages of properties should measure 2.7m by 5.2m. Garages should measure 3.3m by 7m internally and have a minimum door height and width of 2.3m. Plots 1, 9, 10 and 11 each provide four parking spaces within their curtilages, a number of which are to be provided for within either single or detached garages.

Following amended plans, these garages accord with the internal dimensional standards as set out within the Parking SPD. They additionally have garage doors which accord with the 2.3m height requirement. Plot 8 is a three bedroomed property and has 3 parking spaces (one of which is a garage) and again this parking is acceptable. Plots 2-7, following amended plans, now all demarcate three vehicle parking spaces within their curtilages. It is however acknowledged that, as per paragraph 8.2 of the Parking SPD, additional spaces above tandem parking (on car behind another) will not contribute to the overall standard. Additionally a number of these spaces are confined by walls/landscaping and should measure 3m wide as per the SPD, however spaces of 2.7m wide are proposed. This provision would therefore not accord with the SPD’s standards. However, as the development would not result in displacement of parked vehicles onto the main A340, which could interrupt the free flow of traffic, it is not considered, in this instance, that this shortfall/under-provision would warrant a refusal reason. Space would be available to residents who which to park three cars on their drive and additionally, the shared surface would be available for any overflow. In addition to the vehicular parking spaces shown within the curtilages of each plot, five unallocated visitor parking spaces would be provided. These have been located in areas to best serve the development, whilst also avoiding any significant loss of public open space. These spaces are in accordance with the relevant dimensional standards. Cycle storage and parking provision is also required by the Parking SPD. 2-3 bedroomed properties require two long term spaces and one short term space, whist four bedroomed dwellings or more require three long term spaces and one short term. The proposed provision in this regard is to be provided by either garden sheds or within garages. Details of the sheds have been submitted and are considered to suitably provide for cycle parking. The submitted garage details are also considered acceptable in regard to vehicular and cycle parking. Tracking details of the turning head have been submitted and demonstrate that larger vehicles, including emergency and service vehicles can enter and exit the site in a forward gear, as well as pass any oncoming car. The Highway Officer confirmed the plans acceptability in this regard. Refuse and recycling collection facilities have been demonstrated on the submitted site plan. Initially, concerns were raised in regards to the siting of a number of these areas, however amended plans have been submitted which seek to address these concerns. These amended areas would now accord with the guidance contained with the Design and Sustainability SPD in this regard. Storage provision for refuse and recycling is however not provided. Such details can nevertheless be secured via condition. In regards to the proposed footway, details of materials are secured via condition 7 and a method statement/levels plan is secured via condition 20 of the outline permission. It is however considered that in order to better integrate the development into the wider area, a link to the footpath from the turning head, within the southeast

corner of the site be provided. Whilst no such link is shown on the submitted site plan, a condition requiring details of this is considered reasonable. Therefore subject to the above noted conditions, the development would accord with Policies CN9 and EM10 in this regard. Scale The proposed built form would comprise of semi-detached or detached properties. As noted within the Officers report for the outline application, properties in the surrounding area are predominately detached. There are however numerous examples of semi-detached properties in the area and dwelling styles are mixed and varied. In this regard, it is considered that the varied design, scale and form of the proposed semi and detached dwellings would have due regard to the character of the surrounding area. Amended plans received during the course of the application further refined a number of the proposed house types. The initially proposed terrace of buildings has been replaced by semi-detached properties. This better reflects the established local character whist also resulting in improvements to the streetscene and residential amenities. Appearance Architectural detailing within the elevations include opening headers and cills, decorative brickwork, chimneys, hanging tile, gables and porches. Such detailing responds positively to the site’s semi-rural setting and results in a scheme which would provide a varied and visually appealing streetscene. Red brick and clay tile roofs are the predominate local material whist also being vernacular for the area in general. Five of the proposed dwellings would incorporate clay tile roof whilst the remaining six would utilise slate roofing. While the use of slate is not as widespread locally, provided that it is of a suitable quality, would represent an appropriate alternative material. Details of all external continues to be secured via condition 6 place on application 15/03029/OUT. Therefore subject to the above noted conditions, the development would accord with the requirements of the outline permission as well as Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan. The development would also be in accordance with the guidance contained with the Design and Sustainability SPD. Landscaping Sufficient space would be provided around the dwellings enabling a suitable landscaping scheme to be implemented, softening the built form and helping to assimilate the development into its semi-rural setting. The existing trees bordering the site would remain in situ and would continue to largely screen the site from the A340. Soft landscaping details have been submitted as part of this application and are considered to acceptable. The landscape Officer raising no objection in this regard. Additionally hard landscaping details and boundary treatments are also secured via conditions placed on application 15/03029/OUT. Whilst the submitted boundary treatment details are largely acceptable in principle, further details of these

matters are required. These continue to be secured via conditions placed on the outline permission. Such detail includes scaled plans of the proposed fencing/walls.

- 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 (para 175) and Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. The ecological value of this site was considered and established as part of the outline application 15/03029/OUT. That application was supported by an Ecological Assessment and a Phase II Bat and Reptile Report. Condition 9 of the Outline permission secures details of wildlife protection and habitat enhancement scheme as recommended by the above noted reports. The submitted plans indicate the areas in which such provision would be made, however full details as required by condition 9 are still required. The Biodiversity Officer has raised no objection to the submitted plans in this regard. The details secured by condition 9 are still outstanding and are required prior to commencement, an informative will be added to bring this to the applicants attention. The development therefore remains in accordance with the principles set out within the outline permission and would comply with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan in this regard.

- 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 arboricultural value and implications of the site were considered and established as part of the outline application 15/03029/OUT. The main arboricultural concern for this site relates to the proposed pedestrian footpath which lies within the root protection area of a significant oak tree. Details of this element, as well as the site as a whole, were secured through conditions 18, 19 and 20 placed on application 15/03029/OUT. The Tree Officer raised concerns with the proposals as this reserved matters submission had not been supported by a tree report. Whilst the proposed layout largely reflects that indicatively considered as part of the outline application, changes have occurred, particularly in relation to the siting of Plot 11 which is sited in proximity to a number of trees. A subsequent updated Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) and Tree Protection Plan was submitted to demonstrate that the impact on trees remains acceptable. This report states in paragraph 6.8 that “provided the recommendations in this report are follow, the arboricultural impact of this development is considered acceptable”. Plot 11 would remain outside of the root

protection areas of nearby trees and suitable protection measures can be implemented. The Tree Officer has not commented upon the updated AIA, however in light of the limited changes to the siting of the dwellings from those considered acceptable under the outline stage, the updated AIA adequate demonstrates that appropriateness of the changes. Subsequent amendments to the layout have been undertaken following submission of the above report. Consequently, in order to ensure that all plans and documents relate to the approved layout, a revised tree protection plan is required. Such details however can be secured via condition and will run alongside the requirements set out within conditions 18, 19 and 20 of the outline consent (15/03029/OUT). It is therefore considered that the development would be in accordance with the provisions of the outline consent and subject to the above mentioned conditions, would ensure that the impacted trees would be suitably protected. The development accords with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan in this regard. Flooding and Drainage The NPPF requires that new development should be either directed away from areas at highest risk or alternatively demonstrated to be flood resilient and resistant, to include safe access and egress without increasing residual flood risk elsewhere. This applies a sequential approach, 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. Similarly, 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. Policy EM7 also states that major developments are required to ensure that sustainable drainage systems are used for the management of surface water unless demonstrated to be inappropriate. In accordance with the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Map for Planning, the site is located entirely within Flood Zone 1 and is at low risk from fluvial flooding. The sites suitability for residential development in relation to flooding/flood risk was considered as part of the outline application 15/03029/OUT. Condition 21 of that permission requires that details of surface water and foul drainage be submitted and approved prior to commencement of works on site. This condition remains in place and is considered adequate in ensuring that the development is carried out in an appropriate manner. An informative will be added to bring this to the applicant’s attention. The servicing of the residential properties with a foul drainage system would require agreement with Thames Water as the statutory undertaker under the Water Industries Act 1991. This Act imposes a duty to ensure that flows resulting from new

development do not cause detriment to the existing public sewerage networks with duties to accommodate such flows into their networks. This legal mechanism sits outside of the planning process. The provision of a water supply would again be the statutory responsibility of South East Water through agreement also secured under Water Industries Act 1991. 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. Consideration of the potential contamination of the site was given as part of the outline application. Given the past use of the site and the sensitive end-user (residential), it was necessary to secure the submission of contamination assessments. Conditions 22 and 23 continue to apply to this site and details in this regard is required prior to commencement of development. An informative will be added to bring this to the applicants attention. Minerals The proposed development lies within a mineral consultation area (MCA). This area is informed by the mineral safeguarding area (MSA) as defined through Policy 15: Safeguarding – mineral resources of the adopted Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (2013) (HMWP) and indicates where viable, safeguarded mineral resources are likely to be present. The purpose of this policy is to protect potentially economically viable mineral resource deposits from needless and unnecessary sterilisation. However, given the size of the proposed development, it is not considered viable for any extraction to take place. Hampshire County Council would encourage the use of any material that may be recovered through the construction phases of the development on site. 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. Whilst Policy EM9 was not adopted at the time of the decision of the outline application (15/03029/OUT), it is considered reasonable to require any development on this site to accord with this latest policy requirement, and the guidance contained within the NPPF. A condition securing details of compliance with this standard should therefore be attached to any approval.

Community Infrastructure Requirements The Section 106 agreement linked to the outline application 15/03029/OUT required the provision of on-site affordable housing and Public Open Space. As noted above, the proposed four affordable units would accord numerically with this legal requirement and the Housing Officer has raised no objection in this regard. Similarly, the area of Public Open Space shown has been considered acceptable by the Public Open Space Officer. Further details of both of these contributions are required by the Section 106 agreement and an informative reminding the applicant of these is included. 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 be CIL liable as outline permission was granted prior to the Council’s introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. Other matters In addressing comments made by a number of representations, it is not reasonable as part of this Reserved Matters submission to seek to re-consider the means of access to the site, including any provision of traffic calming measures, mini-roundabouts etc. Access to the site for up to 12 dwellings was considered as part of the outline application as was deemed acceptable. Additionally comments made in relation to the principle of residential development on this site are not material as part of the consideration of these reserved matters. Comments in relation to means of construction access and works are addressed by condition 11 of the outline permission which requires a Construction Method Statement to the be submitted and approved prior to works commencing on site. Details of the route of access to the site is required by criterion ii. and xi. Hours of work and deliveries during the construction phase are covered by conditions 12 and 13 of the outline permission. The 2017 EIA regulations require ‘subsequent’ applications to be considered (section 10 refers) and reserved matters applications are considered to be subsequent applications. Application 15/03029/OUT confirmed that the outline application was not EIA development. Since that time the new EIA regulations 2017 have come into force and section 10 refers; ‘Subsequent applications where environmental information not previously provided’. The development would not meet the thresholds of Schedule 2 section 10(b), which are 150 dwellings and an application site larger than 5 hectares. The development is for 11 dwellings and the site measures approximately 1.2ha. This subsequent application is therefore considered not to be EIA development.

Planning Balance and conclusion As is set out above, the proposed development would fail to accord with Policy CN3, in that it would not provide a mix of housing which would address local requirements, whilst overproviding larger units, conflicting with the relevant guidance and evidence. It is not considered that the submitted justification of the proposed mix fully address the evidence in this regard held by the Council, as is set out within the Housing SPD. As a result, the development would fail to fully represent a sustainable form of development, not supporting the creation of a mixed and balanced community, failing to address local housing needs. This weighs against the proposed development. As is set out above, the application must be considered in accordance with paragraph 11 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 protected 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. There are no protected areas or assets relevant to this application. The proposed appearance, layout and scale of the proposed dwellings are considered to appropriately respond to the surrounding development. The proposals include a suitable soft landscaping scheme which would help integrate the development into its semi-rural setting whilst details of hard landscaping and boundary treatments are to be secured via condition. Appropriate parking provision is made within the site, albeit not fully in accordance with the Parking SPD. Similarly, appropriate cycle parking provision is also made. Suitable waste and recycling collection provision is also made within the site and areas of storage can be secured via condition. 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 11 dwellings at a time when the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year housing supply position. The provision of dwellings would enhance and maintain the vitality for the community of Pamber End. Additionally, the development would provide for 40% affordable housing (equating to four units) in accordance with policy requirements and secured via the Section 106 legal agreement attached to the outline permission. The development would also conform to the latest energy efficiency standards and building regulations as well as resulting in a net gain for biodiversity. All these matters, taken together, are afforded significant weight in favour of the development. Therefore, in taking account of both the matters in support and those against the proposed development, it is considered that the benefits would outweigh the harm

identified, namely failure to comply with Policy CN3. As such, the development should be approved subject to the conditions set out below. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans:

- P0-01 Site Location Plan - P1-01 Rev F Proposed Site Plan - P1-02 Rev F Proposed Landscaping Plan - P2-01-GS01 Garden Shed Plans - P1-03 Plot 1 Topographical Information - P2-01-H01 Rev A Plot 1 Floor Plans - P2-01-GA01 Rev A Plot 1 Garage Plans - P2-02-H01 Rev A Plot 1 Roof Plan - P3-01-H01 Rev B Plot 1 Front and Side Elevations - P3-02-H01 Rev B Plot 1 Rear and Side Elevations - P2-01-H02 Rev A Plots 2-3 Floor Plans - P2-02-H02 Rev A Plot 2-3 Roof Plan - P3-01-H02 Rev A Plots 2-3 Front and Side Elevations - P3-02-H02 Rev A Plots 2-3 Rear and Side Elevations - P2-01-H04 Plots 4-5 Floor Plans - P2-02-H04 Plots 4-5 Roof Plans - P3-01-H04 Rev A Plots 4-5 Front and Side Elevations - P3-02-H04 Rev A Plots 4-5 Rear and Side Elevations - P2-01-H06 Rev A Plots 6-7 Floor Plans - P2-02-H06 Rev A Plots 6-7 Roof Plans - P3-01-H06 Rev A Plots 6-7 Rev B Front and Side Elevations - P3-02-H06 Rev A Plots 6-7 Rev B Rear and Side Elevations - P2-01-H08 Rev A Plot 8 Floor and Roof Plans - P2-01-GA08 Rev A Plot 8 Garage Plans - P3-01-H08 Rev A Plot 8 Elevations - P2-01-H09 Rev A Plot 9 Floor Plans - P2-01-GA09 Rev A Plot 9 Garage Plans - P2-02-H09 Rev A Plot 9 Roof Plan - P3-01-H09 Plot 9 Front and Side Elevations - P3-02-H09 Rev A Plot 9 Rear and Side Elevations - P2-01-H10 Rev A Plot 10 Floor Plans - P2-01-GA10 Rev A Plot 10 Garage Plans - P2-02-H10 Rev A Plot 10 Roof Plan - P3-01-H10 Rev A Plot 10 Front and Side Elevations - P3-02-H10 Rev A Plot 10 Rear and Side Elevations

- P2-01-H11 Plot 11 Floor Plans - P2-01-GA11 Rev A Plot 11 Garage Plans - P2-02-H11 Plot 11 Roof Plan - P3-01-H11 Plot 11 Rear and Rear Elevations - P3-02-H11 Plot 11 Front and Side Elevations REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 No development including site clearance, demolition, ground preparation,

temporary access construction/widening, material storage or construction works shall commence until an updated Tree Protection Plan in accordance with the Arboricultural Method Statement prepared by SJ Stephens Associates dated 18/03/19, prepared in accordance with BS5837:2102 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved protection plan. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement of the development 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 (February 2019), Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

3 Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, prior to hard

landscaping works commencing on site, details of a pedestrian footway connection from the internal access road to the east of Plot 11, at the southern part of the access road, to the proposed new footpath (running along the east of the site), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once approved the development shall be carried out, and thereafter maintained, in accordance with the approved details. REASON: In the interests of creating a well connected, accessible and functional development in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 All vehicle parking spaces within the proposed development shall be carried

out with the approved plans and thereafter not 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.

5 No part of the development shall be occupied until refuse storage facilities

have been provided in accordance with detailed drawings to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, such drawings to show the position, design, materials and finishes thereof. Development shall be carried out, and thereafter maintained, in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the storage of refuse does not harm highway safety or impact detrimentally upon the amenities of the site in accordance with Policies CN9, EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018) and Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

6 No development above ground slab level shall commence until sectional

drawings demonstrating that the rooflight within bedroom 1 of the Plot 1 would be at least 1.7m above floor level have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retain as approved in perpetuity. REASON: To protect the privacy of the adjacent property and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

7 The bathroom window at first floor level on the northern elevation of Plot 1,

the bathroom window at first floor level within the southwest elevation of Plot 11, the stairway window within the southern elevation of Plot 7 and the en-suite windows within Plots 9 and 10 hereby permitted shall be glazed with obscured glass which achieves at least the equivalent of Pilkington obscurity level 4, and shall be permanently maintained in that condition. REASON: To protect the privacy of the adjacent property and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

8 A minimum of one open market and one affordable dwelling shall be built to

accessible and adaptable standards to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change. No development above ground slab level shall commence on site until details of which properties are to be built to such standards are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the planning submission and to ensure an appropriate co-ordinated high quality form of development and to accord with Policies CN1 and CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Housing Supplementary Planning Document.

9 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until 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, unless otherwise agreed in writing with 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.

10 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 Classes A, B, C, E or F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected/undertaken for Plot's 1 and 11 on the application site without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority on an application made for that purpose. REASON: In order to protect the amenities of neighbouring properties and to protect and safeguard nearby trees of value in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

Informative(s):- 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:-

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 54-57).

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit; meeting with the applicant to discuss the merits of the application; considering amended plans; the application was subject to the imposition of conditions.

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. 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 [email protected] to commence the process. Details can also be found on the Council's website.

4. 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.

5. The applicant is reminded that a number of conditions placed on the outline

permission, 15/03029/OUT, still require discharging, a number of which are pre-commencement. There are also conditions placed on 15/03029/OUT, whilst not requiring the need to be formally discharged, should be complied with.

mailto:[email protected]

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Location plan

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Proposed Site Plan

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Plot 1 - Proposed Elevations

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Plot 1 – Proposed Floor Plans

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Plots 2-3 - Proposed Elevations

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Plot 10 - Proposed Elevations

Proposed Street Scene

Front

Cttee: 7 August 2019

Item No. 2

Application no: 19/00018/OUT


Site Address Land At Upper Cufaude Farm Cufaude Lane Bramley Hampshire

Proposal Residential development for up to 350 dwellings and land reserved for a primary school with associated access, community facilities, drainage works (SuDS), areas of open space and landscaping. Demolition of existing farm buildings.

Registered: 2 January 2019 Expiry Date: 3 April 2019


Outline Planning Application

Case Officer: Sue Tarvit 01256 845241

Applicant: Croudace Homes Agent: Miss S Lucas

Ward: Bramley And Sherfield

Ward Member(s): Cllr Venetia Rowland Cllr Nicholas Robinson

Parish: BRAMLEY CP OS Grid Reference: 465542 156647

Recommendation: The applicant be invited to enter into a legal agreement (in accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 and Policies SS3.8, CN1, CN6, CN7, CN8, CN9, EM4 and EM5 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029) between the applicant and the Borough and County Councils to secure:

Affordable housing

Landscape Management Plan

Biodiversity enhancements – provision of toad tunnel on Cufaude Lane (including maintenance and monitoring)

Travel Plan and School Travel Plan

On site open space

Community hall

On site play provision (MUGA and LEAP) Off-site financial provision:

Transport

Education

Should the requirements set out above not be satisfactorily secured, then the Planning and Development Manager be delegated to REFUSE permission for appropriate reasons. On completion of the legal agreement(s) the Planning and Development Manager be delegated to grant planning permission subject to the conditions at the end of the report.


Reasons for Approval

1. The proposed development would deliver housing development in accordance with the Borough's Land Supply requirements. The proposal therefore accords with the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) in relation to housing supply and the Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief (March 2019), Policies SS1 and SS3.8 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

2. The proposed development would provide safe access in accordance with

highway requirements, and as such would accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and with Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

3. The proposed development would have an impact on local biodiversity but the mitigation measures proposed result in a scheme that would conserve the biodiversity value and nature conservation interests of both the site and adjoining SINCs, whilst delivering housing development. The proposal therefore complies National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. The proposed development would have an impact on the landscape character and scenic quality of the area but the enclosed nature of the site and the mitigation measures proposed would result in a scheme that balances landscape character and scenic quality whilst delivering housing development. The proposal therefore complies National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5. The proposed development would have an impact upon the setting of the listed buildings but the land safeguarded around the buildings would minimise the impact on these dwellings. The proposal therefore complies with National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6. The proposed development would provide affordable housing to meet an identified need. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019); Policy CN1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the Council's Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document 2018.

7. Through the provision of a Section 106 agreement the development will provide adequate infrastructure to mitigate the impact of the development in relation to playing fields, parks and open space, equipped play, biodiversity, affordable housing, transport and education. The development therefore complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019); Policies CN1, CN6, EM1, EM4, EM5 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029; the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulation 2010; the Council's adopted Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March

2018), Housing SPD (July 2018), Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD (March 2019); Hampshire County Council 's adopted Transport Contributions Policy (September 2007); Hampshire County Council's Developers' Contribution towards Children's Services Facilities.

General comments This application is brought to the Development Control Committee in line with the scheme of delegation due to the number of objections and the Officer’s recommendation for approval. 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. Therefore, alongside the Development Plan which comprises the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029 and the Bramley Neighbourhood Development Plan, this application must be assessed against the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF), and other relevant guidance and material considerations. The site is situated within the Settlement Policy Boundary as defined by the policies of the adopted Local Plan. The site is allocated for residential development under Policy SS3.8 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (February 2019) 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) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Sustainable Development) Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) Policy SS3 (Greenfield Site Allocations) Policy SS5 (Neighbourhood Planning) Policy SS3.8 (Upper Cufaude Farm) Policy CN1 (Affordable Housing) Policy CN3 (Housing Mix for Market Housing) Policy CN4 (Housing for older people/Specialist housing) Policy CN6 (Infrastructure) Policy CN7 (Essential Facilities and Services)

Policy CN8 (Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM5 (Green Infrastructure) Policy EM6 (Water Quality) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (The Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Bramley Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011-2029 Policy H1 (New housing development) Policy H2 (Provision of housing to meet local needs) Policy CVA1 (Bramley community-valued assets) Policy CVA2 (Provision of new community facilities) Policy D1 (Protecting, complementing and enhancing the historic character and rural setting of Bramley) Policy D2 (Design of new development) Policy RE1 (Reducing flood risk) Policy RE3 (Protection and enhancement of the natural environment) Policy T1 (Improving the footpath and cycleway network) Policy T2 (Improving road safety in Bramley) 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 SPD (March 2018) Heritage SPD (March 2019) Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD (March 2019) Housing SPD (July 2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD (December 2018) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Adopted Green Space Standards Description of Site The site is located to the north of Razors Farm (Vyne Park) a residential development of 425 dwellings which is currently under construction. To the south of Razors Farm is the Hampshire International Business Park which is on the northern edge of Chineham. The site is bounded by agricultural land to the west, Cufaude Lane to the north and east beyond which is a railway line on the eastern side.

Beyond the railway line to the southeast is the existing residential area known as Sherfield Park. The site consists of approximately 23ha of farmland, comprising two arable fields, a grassland field and an area to the north with associated farm buildings, yard and bungalow. A public footpath runs along the inside of the southern boundary from Cufaude Lane running west. An existing national cycleway network route (no.23) runs along Cufaude Lane to the east/north of the site. The field boundaries within and around the site are demarcated by hedgerows (interspersed with trees) and ditches as well as a small area of woodland to the south and southwest beyond the site boundary. The route of a Roman road runs across the western half of the site from the middle of the southern boundary running towards the northwest corner of the site, although this is not demarcated on the ground by any field boundaries or other physical features. Proposal The is an outline application which seeks the approval of the principle of developing the site for up to 350 dwellings and land reserved for a primary school with associated access, community facilities, drainage works, areas of open space and landscaping. The proposals will also require the demolition of existing farm buildings (including farm bungalow and barns). Only access is for consideration in detail as part of this application, with two access points proposed on the southern boundary, which would connect into the existing roads in Razors Farm. The illustrative layout for the proposed scheme and other plans which show the siting of buildings and their scale and form are indicative only, and demonstrate that the proposed development can be accommodated on the site. If outline planning permission were granted, details such as the siting and final design of the buildings would be secured by subsequent reserved matters planning applications. Open space including landscape buffers, public open space, kickabout areas, structural landscaping and SuDs would be dispersed throughout the development site. A community hall and Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) are indicatively shown on the northern extent of the residential area with associated parking. A reserve school site is indicatively shown centrally within the site to the east of the route of the Roman Road. This site would be capable of accommodating a two form entry primary school. Other points to note in describing the proposed development include:

The average density would be 29 dwellings per hectare (dph)

The submitted Design and Access Statement states that the majority of new homes would be two storey in height. The D&A acknowledges that there would be lower building heights such as garages as well as one and a half

storey heights. The D&A states that there may be opportunities for enhanced storey heights but this will be determined at the detailed design stage through the submission of reserved matter applications

40% of the dwellings would be affordable units

Parking will exceed the relevant council standards

The development proposes the retention (where possible) of all boundary and internal trees, hedgerows and water courses within green corridors, linking to those in Vyne Park (Razors Farm) to the south and also provides open space areas to the north of the site

There will be no vehicular access from the site onto Cufaude Lane

The land to the east of Cufaude Lane (which forms part of the allocation) does not form part of this application

The applicant has indicated the following housing mix:

SIZE Market % = market unit numbers

Affordable % = affordable unit numbers

1 bed 10 = 21 40 = 56

2 bed 35 = 74 35 = 49

3 bed 40 = 84 25 = 35

4 bed + 15 = 31 0 = 0

The submitted affordable housing statement confirms that 140 units in total would be affordable which equates to 40%, and 70% would be rented (98) and 30% would be intermediate (42) tenures. 15% of the affordable units would be to enhanced accessibility or adaptability standards. This would equate to 15 rental dwellings and 6 intermediate dwellings. The affordable housing would be pepper-potted through the development. The application has been accompanied by the following documents:

Design and Access Statement

Illustrative Masterplan

Parameters Plan

Land Use Plan

Access and Movement Plan

Open Space Plan

Character Areas Plan

Planning Statement

Statement of Community Involvement

Primary Education Needs Assessment

Primary Care Needs Assessment

Transport Assessment

Framework Travel Plan

Written Scheme of Investigation and Archaeological Evaluation reports

Heritage Assessment

Flood Risk Assessment

Drainage Strategy

Utility Statement

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Ecological Assessment

Aboricultural Statement

Tree Protection Plan

Phase 1 Desk Study and Site Reconnaissance Report

Noise Assessment

Vibration Assessment

Air Quality Assessment During the course of the application additional information was received as follows:

Transport Addendum and Amended Framework Travel Plan

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal

Phase 2 Ecological Surveys

Outline Ecological Enhancement and Management Strategy (including Biodiversity Impact Assessment)

Technical Briefing Note – Supplementary Information to Address Biodiversity Team Comments

Toad Mitigation Option Study and Proposed Strategy

Amendments to Design and Access Statement to reflect minor changes Consultations Bramley Parish Council: "Bramley Parish Council has met to consider planning application 19/00018/OUT concerning 350 dwellings at Upper Cufaude Farm, Bramley. We note that the SPD for this site has yet to be published and so it is difficult to judge this application against its contents. This fact did not seem to worry the Planning Policy group of Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council who quote said SPD in an email to Sue Tarvit contained within the application. A quote by BDBC officers is included in the formal application document, and commends this planning application as having followed the SPD. Given that this document is not yet approved this seems a fanciful statement by the applicant. We note in the noise report, the statements that "MOD land is predominately used for storage" and that low level helicopter operations are "occasional." Neither of these statements are true; the MOD land is a training area with frequent and regular weapons training which often entails low level insertions and exits by helicopters hovering at low level over the site for prolonged periods. The MOD land provides the main off base training area for RAF Odiham due to the short transit time required. Bramley Parish Council is contacting RAF Odiham in an attempt to obtain data on their local operations. Thames Water, in their submission, note "the inability of existing foul network infrastructure to accommodate the needs of this potential development." We expect that this will be addressed at the reserved matters stage, but Bramley Parish Council feel that such a fundamental part of a large development should be addressed at the earliest opportunity.

The Highways Authority recommends a "holding objection" due to highway concerns; again the time to address these concerns is surely now given the expressed concerns about traffic travelling through Sherfield Park to a congested junction on the A33 and the possibility of more traffic on Cufaude Lane. The flood risk assessment admits the site is at risk of pluvial flooding. The planned solution seems to be to drain the site northwards towards Bow Brook and thence towards Sherfield-on-Loddon. This is against the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy RE 1. The present farmhouse and outbuildings should be demolished and removed from within the site with NO access to Cufaude Lane in order to minimise heavy traffic on the lane. The indicative layout shows several questionable features. The landscape buffer along the eastern edge appears to be of minimal size and at its narrowest opposite existing dwellings. These are occasionally misidentified as Small Barn and Upper Cufaude Barn. It also shows a group of trees to be removed from this same area. Is the aim to include the present dwellings within the development or to respect their historical nature as part of the original Cufaude Farm? The overall layout appears more urban when the aim should be to provide a more rural setting. This is against policies D1 and D2 of the Bramley NDP. The overall concept seems flawed as it appears to continue the urban sprawl to the north of Basingstoke and impacts the Strategic Gap between Basingstoke and Bramley laid down in Policy EM2 of Basingstoke & Deane Local plan." Comments on additional/amended information: “The projected increase in traffic to the Chineham roundabouts was noted – Councillors asked if the traffic movements on Cufaude Lane will increase similarly. Other objections still stand, as the issues have not been addressed.” Chineham Parish Council: “Chineham Parish Council notes and wishes to be associated with the comments made by Bramley Parish Council in their letter of 21 February 2019. To proceed any further with this application until the issues of foul drainage, surface water drainage and highway concerns would be irresponsible. None of the concerns in Chineham Parish Council’s response to the adopted Local Plan have been addressed in any way: •The traffic entering an already congested area via Hanmore Road and Reading Road. •The lack of any measures to alleviate the over burdening of medical facilities •The provision of only one suitable primary school for the increased numbers, either on Upper Cufaude Farm or East of Basingstoke will mean pupils crossing the A33 twice daily, violating the principles of Safe Journeys to School. Policy SS3.8 – Upper Cufaude Farm of the adopted Local Plan includes the following:

1. f) Include measures to mitigate the impact of development on the local

road network and in particular, Cufaude Lane and the A33 Corridor; 2. g) Include measures to improve accessibility by non-car transport modes,

particularly to Basingstoke town centre, including the ability to service the site by public transport and the connection of the site with existing cycle and pedestrian routes and the Public Right of Way network, including access to the potential Chineham Railway Station, Cufaude Lane and in conjunction with the development of Razor’s Farm;

3. i) Ensure adequate infrastructure is provided for sewerage (on and off site) and surface water drainage and produce a drainage strategy;

This outline application meets none of these policies and should be refused; these matters are too fundamental to be considered as ‘reserved matters’.” Comments on additional/amended information: “My Planning Committee reviewed this application again last week and agreed that their original comments were still appropriate and would remain unchanged although it was also noted that there are already drainage issues under the Cufaude Lane railway bridge which could be made worse by development on this site.” Sherfield on Loddon Parish Council: “Object to this application. Transport – Local Plan CN9 Transport – the integration within the infrastructure of such a number of vehicles will cause issues along the Bramley Road and out on to the A33. Traffic movements will increase on to the A33. There is no clear indication of how this development would have public transport links. These should be demonstrated. Local Plan Policy SS3.8 advises the provision of a 2 form entry primary school if required. We would like to see the evidence that this is either not required or the clear commitment from Hampshire County Council to the provision. We also note that there is a provision for a community centre however there is no provision for a doctors surgery or health care facilities.” Sherfield Park Parish Council: “While supporting the general principles of the application, which deals with access to the site, the Parish Council’s Planning Committee have the following detailed concerns for consideration by the Borough:

1. During the construction phase the developers should be required to restrict construction traffic to the long-term access routes through Vyne Park to Crockford Road (ie. no access through Sherfield plan from the A33, with greater efforts being made to enforce this than deployed for the Taylors Farm development.)

2. There should be no use of residential roads in Sherfield Park for the parking of contractor’s vehicles or for vehicles delivering material to the site, eg Cufaude Lane or Amport Road

3. Long term pedestrian access from the site onto Cufaude Lane should only be via existing footpaths, due to the dangerous nature of Cufaude Lane which is very narrow and winding, with poor visibility and degradation of the road edges

4. On safety and traffic flow grounds, there should be a clear physical boundary along the border of the site with Cufaude lane to stop pedestrians developing informal access between the development and Cufaude Lane. This will be critical should the planning school be built, to ensure vehicles do not stop on Cufaude lane to drop children to walk through to the school.

5. The proposed cycle path from the development onto Cufaude lane between blocks S & T should be removed as it represents a danger to vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians and is not a necessary or desirable addition to cycle paths or the subsequent pedestrian access using this route. Cycle access should only be from the northern cycle entrance opposite Upper Cufaude Barn; from the south via the two primary access routes through Vyne Park to Crockford Road, or by using the railway footbridge from old Cufaude Lane/towards Rockbourne Road.

It was the committee’s strongly held view that the road under the railway bridge is extremely dangerous with the tight bend and narrow road width. They therefore suggest that the Borough and the Developer should consider the introduction of a one way system for light vehicles:

Northbound light traffic of less than 12ft in height use Cufaude Lane and travel towards Bramley under the railway bridge, with

Southbound light traffic coming from Bramley entering the development via the line of the northern cycle route and exiting from the development via the two primary access routes to Crockford Lane.”

Hampshire County Highways: Following receipt of additional information no objection subject to conditions and completion of legal agreement to secure:

Highways contributions towards improvements at the Binfield Roundabout and the Crockford Roundabout;

Extension of Vyne park bus service for an additional 5 years

Full residential Travel Plan and associated fees and bond Hampshire Archaeology: No objection subject to conditions to secure:

Completion of archaeological evaluation

Archaeological mitigation arising out of the result of the evaluation Hampshire Education: Comments raised in relation to:

Potential traffic congestion

The proposed location does not prioritise pedestrian and cycle movements; does not create safe, secure and attractive places

Proposals do not promote opportunities for sustainable transport modes (cycling and walking)

Concern regarding levels of air pollution due to school location next to road If considered acceptable education contributions and travel plan should be secured through section 106 process. HCC Lead Local Flood Authority: General principles for the surface water drainage system are acceptable subject to further information on the proposals being

submitted as part of a more detailed design phase and therefore recommend conditions. Thames Water: Waste: identified an inability of the existing foul water network infrastructure to accommodate the needs of this development proposal. Thames Water have contacted the developer in an attempt to agree a position for foul water networks but have been unable to do so in the time available and as such Thames Water request that the a condition be added to any planning permission to ensure no properties are occupied until confirmation has been provided that either:- all wastewater network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows from the development have been completed; or- a housing and infrastructure phasing plan has been agreed with Thames Water to allow additional properties to be occupied. Joint Waste Client Team: Concerns regarding current layout and accessibility to waste collection vehicles. Waste collection strategy needed. Housing: No objection Landscape: No objection - amendments to the detail will be required at the next stages of development. Trees: Comprehensive details about veteran and ancient trees is welcomed and provide the necessary assurance that this aspect has been fully considered. Need to ensure buffer to SINC is maintained. Biodiversity: following the receipt of additional information, no objection subject to conditions. Natural England: Considers the proposals will not have likely significant effects on designated sites and has no objection to the proposed development. Also raised following comments:

Advised had not assessed the application and associated documents in relation to protected species and refer to standing advice and council’s own ecologist. In order for your authority to be assured that the proposal meets the requirements of the standing advice and the additional requirements for biodiversity enhancement and net gain as set out in National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 8, 118, 170, 174 and 175d, Natural England recommends that the application is supported by a Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (BMEP), or equivalent, that has been agreed by your authority’s Biodiversity Officer.

Advised should consider any local wildlife or geodiversity sites in line with paragraph 113 of the NPPF. There may be opportunities to enhance local sites and improve their connectivity

Need to consider the impact on ancient woodland and veteran trees in line with paragraph 118 of the NPPF.

Following comments from the local ‘Toad Patrol’ group Natural England added the following comments:

In our view the development is not insignificant and is likely to lead to

increased traffic movements which will inevitably increase the local amphibian populations’ rates of mortality. Natural England therefore recommends that a toad mitigation strategy is agreed with your authority, which includes provision for a toad tunnel(s) at suitable crossing points.

Comments on additional/amended information:

Toads - The supporting Toad Mitigation Option Study and Proposed Strategy outlines mitigation in the form of a toad tunnel and associated guide ditches. Natural England welcomes this and would advise that the details of this strategy are agreed with the Biodiversity Team.

Skylarks - The Technical Note reiterates that 10 skylarks were recorded on the application site although this figure may be inaccurate due to potential double counting and not all birds may use the site for breeding. In a worst case scenario, it is Natural England’s advice that 1ha of on-site publicly accessible space, as detailed within the Technical Note, would not accommodate a current population of 5 breeding pairs due to the size of open space in question and various other pressures arising from the adjacent development as described in our previous response. Therefore it is considered these proposals may have a residual impact on this species that is not currently addressed.

Protected species - the proposals may incur negative impacts on local protected species populations including badger, dormouse and bats.

Comments awaited on additional/amended information – to be reported on Update. Conservation: No objection Historic England: No objection following receipt of additional information National Trust: Support Historic England’s request for further work is undertaken to establish whether the development proposals can be seen from the windows in the summerhouse. Historically the surrounding landscape would have been made up of smaller arable fields divided by belts of woodland, much of which has been removed. No assessment has been made of the impact of the proposals on the historic landscape character. No comments received on additional information. Environmental Health (Noise): No objection subject to conditions Environmental Health (Contamination): No objection subject to conditions Parks and Open Spaces: Acceptable in principle but the following minor amendments/additional information are needed:

Amendments to illustrate how the open spaces and LEAP will be overlooked to ensure natural surveillance.

Amendments to show how the LEAP will relate more closely to the norther open space.

Improved access to the northern open space for residents in the south east

corner of the site. Community Development: No objection Public Observations Twenty two letters of objection: Principle of development:

Not seen result of consultation exercise on the development brief so the application is premature

Plan appears to be extremely detailed for an outline application and concerned that this will mean the location of buildings will automatically be accepted at a later stage in the process

Comments raised at the public consultation exercise have not been included within the submitted proposals

Already an excess of housing built in the area Biodiversity:

This is a well-known site for migrating toads (site of national importance) and there is no provision for managing their safe passage across the road

Phase 2 survey has failed to identify important adjacent or nearby habitats and species that will be impacted by this proposal and hence does not address the impact of the development on wildlife - particularly in relation to amphibians (Smooth Newt, Common Frog, Common Toad and Great Crested Newt) - lack of adequate environmental survey

Appropriate survey should be undertaken under the supervision of BDBC over the next migrations to plot precisely where the toads cross Cufaude Lane

Appropriate safeguards need to be put in place to preserve habitats for wildlife species, in particular the common toad

Absence of any impact analysis of the hydrological changes that could be caused by the proposed development that could impact upon amphibians

An underpass should be built to help the toad population who cross Cufaude Lane

Concern regarding level of street lighting proposed (at the public consultation)

Absence of any proposals to demonstrate that the developer can deliver net gain to existing amphibian populations or demonstrate and guarantee that sufficient funds will be available to deliver net gains. Absence of Highways Transport Assessment for the whole of Cufaude Lane assessing traffic, cycling and pedestrian need while proposing comprehensive solutions and investment requirements to present and enhance amphibian populations and deliver net gains

Outline proposals are too detailed and concerned that green space proposals could result in disruption of migration routes by attracting amphibians to urban areas

Heritage:

Development is shown too close to the Roman Road which is a non-designated heritage asset

The green space should have a semirural, undeveloped character between the built up area of the development and Cufaude Farm where there are a number of listed buildings

The proposals do not respond positively to the distinctive landscape character and show little innovation or new thinking

Cumulative impact of the site and Razors Farm development not considered fully by applicant

Does not consider that the development would retain and enhance the architectural and historic significance of heritage assets in the area.

Submitted archaeological report is wrong when it states the site has low potential for 'significant archaeology'

More effort needs to be made to incorporate the existing trees into the development

Adverse impact upon The Vyne’s rural setting Landscape:

Number of units proposed is below the local plan allocation figure

Proposals for green infrastructure seem limited

Better use should be made of more natural open areas within the development

The site is in a distinctive area and encompasses an ancient landscape of fields and farmland, and the development needs to respect this

Unclear whether the screen provided by the new development to the existing properties to the north will be the existing trees or will they be replaced

View from dwelling would change from open fields, trees and farmland to looking across a large new build housing estate

LVIA document is biased and does not fully consider impact upon existing properties

Existing hedge screen is deciduous and would not offer screening in winter months

Impact of development not sympathetic to rural character of the area

Plans refer to planting of new trees but then shows removal of trees opposite the two most affected properties

Loss of countryside as an area for public enjoyment Residential amenity:

Proposed dwellings facing Cufaude Lane should be perpendicular to the road which would reduce the impact of the built form and also reduce overlooking

Noise:

Development would affect business due to noise levels - British Standards defined noise levels must be adhered to; continuous monitoring should occur rather than monthly monitoring

Concern that existing dwellings are incorrectly labelled and therefore the noise survey is referring to properties which are incorrectly identified on some of the submitted plans

Existing development at Vyne Park causes noise problems with properties along Cufaude Lane and the current site is closer so concerns about construction noise is greater - also had issues with non-compliance with

working and delivery hours restrictions

Development will lead to long term disruption during the construction process Infrastructure:

Concerned development could result in a loss of power/impact on services which would affect business

Buffer zones between existing properties is extremely narrow and in fact seems to be wider further south where there are currently no houses - this will have a detrimental impact on existing dwellings

Broadband connect and mains sewage should be extended to existing dwellings to help integrate into the new estate

Lack of local shops/takeaways within walking distance of the new developments already built and this proposed development - needs to be provided before development built

School needs to be provided on site - needs to be provided before development built

Park and Stride provision - school should provide enough parking on site rather than making parents and children walk from park and stride locations. These facilities will cause problems twice a day to new residents living near them

Community centre should be located centrally within the site so that it is more accessible to residents in Vyne Park

Consideration of people with disabilities and people who do not drive should be considered for the location of the community centre

Concern regarding impact upon power supply to existing properties which are supplied from Sherborne St John across the site - this should be controlled by condition

What guarantees are there that the school will be provided?

Will there be a doctors surgery because Chineham Medical Practice is overloaded with patients

Highways:

Increase in road traffic, particularly along Rockbourne Road and Cufaude Lane which are being used as a 'rat-run'

Raising comments relating to the draft development brief

Different plans submitted which seem to contradict each other, some showing greater planting opposite existing properties along Cufaude Lane than others

Need to ensure adequate parking provision

If access is to be form Cufaude Lane it needs to be made wider

Concerned that residents will access the A33 via Sherfield Park which is made more difficult due to cars parking on the estate roads

Absence of any Highways Transport Assessment

A33 is at capacity Two letters of comment:

Increased crime

Failure to meet site management requirements on nearby development by the same developer and lack of enforcement from BDBC

Should the application be approved then request that the development includes multiple internal nest sites for Swifts (Swift bricks)

Comments on additional/amended information: Four letters received:

Reiterating concerns regarding the impact of the proposals on amphibians

Any reptile/amphibian barriers should be correctly maintained during the construction period

Toad tunnel should be provided by developer

One toad tunnel is inadequate, a minimum of two tunnels should therefore be provided

Mitigation measures proposed for dormice inadequate and unlikely to have any beneficial effect given the greatly increased cat population. More effective barriers and dense planting will be required.

Species identified in additional ecology information is very sketchy

Grass snakes identified in ecological survey

Question predicted increased traffic usage along Cufaude Lane as a result of proposed development

No changes have been made to the layout in relation to the proximity of the development upon the cluster of dwellings along Cufaude Lane, following comments made on the SPD

No changes made to the need for more open space and the need to place built development further away from Cufaude Lane

Reiterating comments regarding lack of infrastructure (including parking at Bramley station) and that no housing is needed in Bramley

Relevant planning history None for site, but for Razors Farm (Vyne Park) to south: 15/02513/RES Reserved matters application for the

appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of 137 no. dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping forming phase 1 of outline planning permission BDB/77341

Granted 08.01.2016

16/04520/FUL

Erection of 4 no. dwellings, refurbishment and conversion of 2 no. barns to 3 no. dwellings, conversion of granary to outbuilding, erection of a single storey rear extension and alterations to existing farmhouse, demolition of listed and unlisted barns, and associated works and access

Granted

12.05.2017

16/03842/RES Reserved matters application for the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of 157 new dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping forming Phase 2 of outline planning permission BDB/77341

Granted 28.03.2017

17/01269/RES Reserved matters application for details

of landscaping and layout of access road to future pumping station pursuant to outline permission BDB/77341

Granted 19.06.2017

Assessment Principle of development The Development Plan comprises the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. The site lies within the Settlement Policy Boundary (SPB) for Basingstoke as an allocated site under Policy SS3.1. Policy SS1 requires that during the plan period 2011-2029, the Local Plan will make provision to deliver 15,300 dwellings and associated infrastructure. This includes allocating greenfield sites (those set out in Policy SS3) to provide approximately 7,705 dwellings over the plan period. The Local Plan has allocated the greenfield site at Upper Cufaude Farm for 'approximately 390 dwellings' through Policy SS3.8. In terms of delivery of this site it is anticipated that Upper Cufaude Farm will start to delivery dwellings from 2020/21 to 2025/26. The submission of this application is therefore not premature bearing in mind the time it can take from the granting of an outline application to the approval of reserved matters and start on site.

Housing supply The NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to identify a five year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. In addition, and in line with the Housing Delivery Test published in February 2019, a 20% buffer should be added to the borough’s supply. 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. Whilst out of date, they are still considered relevant to the determination of the application, albeit with limited weight. Planning applications will therefore be considered in line with paragraph 11 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.

It is considered that the overall impact on the principle of the proposed development in respect of this particular application is not fundamental. More specifically, as the site is allocated in the ALP (Policy SS3.8) and is located within the Settlement Policy Boundary, the principle of its development is supported by development plan policy. The acceptability of the principle of the proposed development is now supported by the ‘tilted balance’ as per paragraph 11 of the NPPF, which reinforces the acceptability of the principle of the proposed development. However, there are some more specific implications of the lack of a deliverable 5-year housing supply, which will have a bearing on how this application is considered. In particular, the lack of 5-year supply means that the most important development plan policies for determining the application are out of date, inasmuch as they would not provide for a sufficient supply. Of primary importance for the determination of this application is that this will mean that the site allocation policy should be considered ‘out of date’. The implications of policies being out of date was considered in the courts through the Suffolk Coastal case. Both the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court judgements explained that policies being out of date does not render them irrelevant, and they do still have statutory force. However, clearly the amount of weight which can be assigned to them is significantly reduced, meaning that in reality they are very unlikely to form the primary basis for determining applications. Only the policies directly related to the provision of housing should be considered out of date. The other policies within the ALP can still be regarded as up to date. However, within the overall planning balance they will still need to be considered in light of the tilted balance as per paragraph 11 in the NPPF.

Local Plan The proposed development comprises the main part (but not all) of the Upper Cufaude Farm site, which is allocated for approximately 390 new homes in the adopted local plan under Policy SS3.8. Consequently, the principle of the proposed residential development (and community facilities) of the site has been established and is supported from a planning policy perspective. It should be noted that the land on the eastern side of Cufaude Lane is excluded from this application and is not under the applicant’s control. Policy SS3.8 in the Local Plan is the key policy in terms of setting out the site specific requirements. These can be summarised accordingly:

Make provision for social and physical infrastructure, including a community centre and two form entry primary school (criterion b).

Conserve and enhance the architectural and historic significance of heritage assets in the vicinity (criterion c).

Ensure that the layout and design protects the existing landscape and vegetation structure (criterion d).

Keep the northern part of the site free from development and roads, with this area providing only additional landscape and appropriate open space (criterion e).

Provide appropriate green/space infrastructure to meet local needs (criterion f).

Avoid or mitigate direct or indirect adverse impacts on key species and habitats (criterion g).

Mitigate the impact on the local road network, in particular Cufaude Lane and the A33 Corridor (criterion h).

Improve accessibility for non-car transport modes (criterion i).

Ensure acceptable noise standards can be achieved (in light of adjacent railway line and MOD land) (criterion j).

Provide adequate infrastructure for sewerage, surface water and produce a drainage strategy (criterion k).

Incorporate and/or promote renewable and low carbon energy technologies (criterion l).

Ensure that the development provides for a comprehensive development with respect to Razors Farm/Vyne Park to the south (criterion m).

In addition to the principal policy (which is now considered to be out of date), the proposals will also need to be assessed against all relevant policies of the Local Plan. Bramley Neighbourhood Development Plan The council actively supports the principle of neighbourhood planning and this is a central strand of the borough’s approach to future development. This is reflected in the Adopted Local Plan which sets the strategic framework for neighbourhood planning (Policy SS5: Neighbourhood Planning). Bramley Parish Council has a made Neighbourhood Plan, which forms part of the borough’s Development Plan. While the BNDP does not specifically address the Upper Cufaude Farm site allocation, the BNDP policies must be given due consideration when assessing the relevant aspects of this application. The most relevant policies within the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan, particularly in light of the consultation process underpinning the SPD, would be:

H1 – New Housing Development

H2 – Provision of Housing to Meet Local Needs

D1 – Protecting, Complementing and Enhancing the Historic Character and Rural Setting of Bramley

D2 – Design of New Development

RE1 – Reducing Flood Risk

RE3 – Protection and Enhancement of the Natural Environment

T1 – Improving the Footpath and Cycle Way Network

T2 – Improving Road Safety in Bramley. However, in some instances these policies appear to specifically focus upon Bramley village, and consequently in determining the application, consideration of how these should be appropriately applied to this particular site has been considered.

Nevertheless, where BNDP policies are particularly relevant to the principle of development they have been considered as part of the report below.

Sustainable Development The NPPF establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development which sits at the heart of the framework, and is stated to have three dimensions, namely; economic, social and environmental. In response to housing development, the Core Planning Principles of the NPPF state that “planning should proactively drive and support sustainable economic development” in order to deliver the homes and “thriving local places that the country needs”. Every effort should be made to objectively identify and then meet the housing and development needs of an area and respond positively to the wider opportunities for growth. The Local Plan refers to Basingstoke as benefiting from a “high level of facilities and services available, including employment opportunities” and is the main focus for growth over the plan period. This recognises that the town also has good transport links, including for modes other than the private car. Given the size of the town and the level of services and facilities, Basingstoke has been identified as a sustainable location for growth over the plan period. In addressing the proposed development itself under the three dimensions of sustainability, it is acknowledged that the scheme would not provide any direct form of long term economic development. However there would be economic benefits generated through the construction period with spin offs from wage spending of construction workers and supplier sourcing and following this, consumer spending on goods and services within the dwellings and within the local economy. The social aspect of sustainable development would be met through the contribution made to the housing stock, including affordable housing in the new community. Through a comprehensive landscape management plan and provision of biodiversity enhancements, the development can perform some positive environmental benefits. Enhancements can be secured to increase and promote sustainable modes of travel which would secure environmental and social benefits. In respect of further environmental benefits, the impact on the landscape with regard to landscape and visual amenity, nature conservation, flooding and drainage is addressed further within the report below.

Upper Cufaude Farm SPD As per policy SS3 in the ALP, a Development Brief Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) has been produced for the site. The draft SPD was presented to Economic, Planning and Housing Committee in September 2018, and went out to public consultation between 5 November 2018 and 17 December 2018. The final amended SPD was adopted by Full Council in March 2019. The SPD therefore carries full weight as a material consideration in the decision making process. Following the consultation exercise the key changes below were made to the SPD and form part of the adopted SPD:

• Additional clarification has been added concerning the need to recognise the

cluster of 5 dwellings along Cufaude Lane, adjacent to the site. • Reference to hedgerows has been added to development principle 3a(b) to

reiterate the importance of ensuring that hedgerows on and around the site are retained and protected wherever possible.

• Clarification has been added to landscape section (6.1.5) highlighting the need for the landscape design process to ensure that the edges of the site are softened and relate sympathetically to the site’s surroundings.

• A new paragraph has been added to the urban design chapter to emphasise lighting as an important consideration, and in order to provide some general principles for how it should be employed in the new development.

• Increased clarification has been added after the reference to low intensity character in order to explain its meaning.

• The Indicative Development Framework Plan has been amended in order to make reference to ‘up to’ 2.8ha in respect of the potential school site (as requested by HCC) and the potential indicative location for the access has also been amended slightly in order to respond to a technical drawing submitted by HCC.

• An additional paragraph has been added (4.2.7) to address how car journeys to and from the school can be minimised and congestions around the school reduced.

• The concerns of the Local Education Authority in relation to the proximity of the school to the main road through the site have been included in paragraph 4.2.6.

• A short section has been added concerning air quality issues. • Specific reference to accessibility for all residents has been added as a new

paragraph (8.1.13). • New text has been included to reflect comments made regarding the inclusion

of targeted initiatives to encourage walking and cycling. • Reference to the Green Space Standards has been added to paragraph 6.1.1. • Text has been added to clarify that open spaces need to be well related to

surrounding development and benefit from high levels of natural surveillance. • Additional text has been added to paragraph 7.1.9 in order to address issues

raised in relation to historic landscape appraisal. • Changes have been made to principle 4a to improve compliance with

legislation as per consultee comments. • Wording has been added to give more emphasis to improving connections with

Basingstoke Railway Station. In response to representations made in relation to amphibian migration routes, additional detail has been added to the biodiversity section of the SPD in relation to considering, and mitigating the upon, amphibian migration routes. An appendix to the SPD has been included setting out the information which was presented to Cabinet regard the biodiversity issues pertaining to the site in relation to the impact on amphibians (appendix 2). The development brief sets out a number of objectives for the site, which are expressed through a series of development principles which add greater detail to the ALP policies, and provide guidance on how these should be interpreted and

implemented. The primary aim of the SPD is to help ensure that a high quality development is achieved. As stated above, at the current time the council is unable to demonstrate that is has 5 years’ worth of deliverable sites. In relation to the SPD, this is primarily intended to support the delivery of the site allocation policy and as such the weight afforded to the SPD would be reduced. However, the SPD does not directly affect the level of housing provision as this is covered by the allocation policy in the ALP. Furthermore, its scope encompasses a much broader range of policies than just the site allocation policy. Therefore, it is considered that the SPD is still a valid material consideration, though its weight is reduced by the lack of 5-year supply. Affordable Housing and Housing Mix

Affordable Housing Policy CN1 of the Local Plan requires developments of over 10 dwellings to provide for 40% affordable housing, with 70% of these dwellings being for rent and 30% intermediate tenures. At least 15% of the affordable units will also be required to meet enhanced accessibility or adaptability standards to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change. Based on a development of 350 dwelling, a policy compliant scheme would need to provide 140 dwellings on site, of which 98 units should be rented and 42 units intermediate tenures. At least 21 of these affordable homes would be required to meet enhanced accessibility and adaptability standards. The outline proposals propose 140 affordable units and is therefore policy compliant, however the Housing Officer has indicated that the indicative mix should provide a higher number of 4 bed units to meet local demand. In November 2018 housing needs data indicated that there was a need for 209 4 bed units in the borough, and more specifically within Bramley there was a need for 7no. 4 bed units. It is acknowledged that the housing mix is purely indicative at this stage. The legal agreement requires each subsequent reserved matters application to be accompanied by a detailed affordable housing scheme and an affordable housing statement. This would state the types, tenure model, size and location of each affordable dwelling. The size of the dwellings would need to address the most up to date needs data at that point in time. There is an identified affordable housing need within the borough and also the Bramley area. The proposed development would therefore help meet the requirements for those households across the borough in housing need across a range of different bedroom requirements. The provision of affordable housing across the site, as well as a timetable for its provision in relation to the phasing of the site, will be secured through a legal agreement. In light of the above, the proposals are compliant with Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Bramley Neighbourhood

Plan Policy H2. The section 106 agreement will secure 40% affordable housing in line with the policy requirement.

Housing Mix Policy CN3 states that development will be permitted where the mix of market housing includes a range of house type and size to address local requirements, and is appropriate to the area. Evidence is required to demonstrate the appropriateness of the mix proposed. Paragraph 5.28 of the supporting text to Policy CN3 indicates that a mix should take account of the demographics of the area and housing requirements, but also the site characteristics, masterplanning and viability. Policy CN3 also requires 15% of the market dwellings to be accessible and adaptable homes. Policy H2 of the Bramley NP states that the precise housing mix of new development will be determined on a site by site basis, having regard to viability and other relevant factors. The Upper Cufaude Farm SPD under Development Principle 1a, states that the mix of market homes should respond to current and future housing needs:

a) The mix and type of market homes should be informed by up to date evidence of current and future borough wide and local needs. It should include a mix of unit sizes, including smaller dwellings and accommodation for older people.

b) As per the council’s Housing SPD, the development should principally focus on a mix of 2 and 3 bedroom dwellings, with only limited provision for 4 (or more) bedroom units.

c) 15% of market homes should be accessible and adaptable and meet the M4(2) standard of Building Regulations.

The Design and Access Statement states that no more than 30% of the dwellings will be 4 bed or more, with market housing being primarily 2 and 3 bed units. This would indicatively result in 158 of the total 210 market dwellings being 2 and 3 bedroom units. Notwithstanding this indicative mix within the Design and Access Statement, evidence would still be required at the Reserved Matters stage to demonstrate the appropriateness of the mix proposed. However, the submitted information shows a clear indication of the developers’ intention to provide a development which would be compliant in relation to housing mix and Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and Policy H2 of the Bramley NP. Condition 7 requires the reserved matters applications to be in accordance with Policy CN3 and the Housing SPD in terms of housing mix. Highways The NPPF states that when assessing sites that may be allocated for development in plans, or specific applications for development (paragraph 108), it should be ensured that:

a) Appropriate opportunities to provide sustainable transport modes can be – or have been – taken up, given the type of development and its location;

b) Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieve for all user; and c) Any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in

terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety, can be cost effectively mitigated to an acceptable degree.

Paragraph 109 of the NPPF goes on to state that “development should only be prevented or refused on highway grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.” Policy CN9 of the Local Plan (Transport) requires that highway movements are not of an inappropriate type or level as to compromise highway safety with safe and convenient access for potential users and with a compatible on site layout with appropriate parking and serving provision. Policy T1 of the Bramley NP requires development to improve the existing footpath and cycle network, and whilst the map reference in Policy T1 is focused on Bramley village itself, the policy goes on to state that development should improve connectivity, safe routes to school and better access to the countryside and to surrounding destinations. Policy T1 of the Bramley NP states that development will not be supported if it is demonstrated that there will be a severe adverse impact on road safety at known traffic hazards (Cufaude Lane is identified in Appendix G of the NP). Objective 2 of the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD, is to deliver a sustainable development by making provision for public transport services and safe, well designed, accessible and convenient walking and cycling routes with provision for car based movement. It also seeks to maintain and enhance National Cycle Network Route 23, and to prevent any significant detrimental impacts on Cufaude Lane (in terms of highway safety.) In support of the application the applicant has undertaken a multimodal trip generation assessment. The methodology of this assessment was agreed at the pre-application stage with HCC Highways. Trip generation

Residential trips The TA provides the trip rates and trip generation for the residential aspect of the development and therefore excludes trips associated with the proposed primary school. These trip rates were agreed with HCC during the pre-application stage. The agreed residential trip rates are:

AM (08:00-09:00) PM (17:00-18:00)

Arrival Departure Two-way Arrival Departure Two-way

Vehicle Trips

33 135 168 158 72 230

Vehicle Trip

Rates

0.092 0.387 0.481 0.452 0.207 0.659

As these trip rates were agreed with HCC, they have been used to assess the development’s impact later in the TA.

Educational trips External education trips for the safeguarded primary school site have been calculated using TRICS. The number of internal education trips have then been deducted from the total to provide the number of external education trips only. These trips have been split according to appropriate mode share agreed in the technical note appendices to the TA. The totals show that there would be 103 two way vehicle trips in the AM peak and 6 two way vehicle trips in the PM peak associated with the primary school alone. Site Accessibility

Walking and cycling access As part of the submission, the applicant undertook a Walking and Cycling Audit for the site which is attached to the TA (Appendix D). HCC have reviewed this audit and are satisfied that the walking and cycling facilities in the nearby vicinity are safe and suitable to serve the proposed development as well as the primary school in the future.

Public transport Discussions are currently ongoing with Stagecoach and the developer of Vyne Park (Croudace) regarding the implementation of a new bus service. The submitted TA states that these discussions are now also making inclusion for the new bus service to extend into the proposed development at Upper Cufaude Farm. The bus provision secured in the s106 agreement for Razors Farm (Vyne Park) outlined that the service must be funded for 5 years. The highways authority considers that it would be beneficial to extend the existing Vyne Park provision both physically into the site and for a further 5 year period once the Vyne Park service has finished in accordance with its s106 agreement. HCC Highways are recommending that this is secured through the s106 agreement associated with this current application.

Vehicular Access Vehicle access to the proposed development would be provided via an extension of the internal highway network of the development to the south (Razors Farm). This avoids the need for a new access to be constructed directly onto Cufaude Lane. The

Upper Cufaude Farm SPD states that the principal access point for the main part of the development will need to be through the Razors Farm development. The proposals therefore comply with the SPD in this regard. It should be noted that the land east of Cufaude Lane which forms the remainder of the Upper Cufaude Farm allocation does not form part of this application The SPD states that this part of the site would be accessed off Cufaude Lane, but such an access would have to be assessed under any future planning application. It must be noted that the current proposals do not prevent the eastern parcel of land from being developed, and is in compliance with the SPD in this regard. The application site would be accessed from two points off the Razors Farm development along the application site’s southern boundary, with the indicative layout showing a loop road within the application site. Access drawings were provided for these two access points and assessed by HCC Highways, and these show both visibility splays and swept paths. HCC Highways have confirmed that the principle of the two accesses are acceptable with the details being reviewed at the reserved matters stage. Traffic Distribution and Assignment Development traffic has been distributed and assigned to the local highway network using a methodology agreed with HCC Highways during pre-application discussions as set out in Appendix B of the submitted TA. As previously outline, for the purpose of assessing the impact of the residential development, education related trips have not been included within the distribution. Development traffic has been distributed via each of the following routes:

AM Peak (08:00-09:00) PM Peak (17:00-18:00)

Arrival

Departure

Two-

way

Distribution

Arrival

Departure

Two-

way

Distribution

Cufaude Lane (N)

1 3 4 2% 4 2 6 2%

Chineham

7 30 37 21% 22 10 32 14%

North A33

5 22 27 14% 22 10 32 14%

South A33

21 85 105 70% 111 51 161 70%

Total 34 139 174 100% 159 72 231 100%

HCC Highways have agreed this distribution and this informs the junction capacity assessments below. Traffic Assessment Scope Baseline traffic data was obtained by the applicant using a Manual Classified Turning Count which was undertaken in October 2018. During the time of this count, the improvement works to the A33 between the Binfields Roundabout and the A33/39

ringway interchange are likely to have had an effect on the traffic flows on this link. The applicant therefore used the Redlands 2016 turning movements and HCC Highways have accepted this methodology as robust. A 2023 future year junction assessment has also been undertaken in order to assess the traffic conditions following the full implementation of the development. The modelling also takes account of the following committed developments as Razors Farm (Vyne Park) (425 dwellings), Aurum Green (130 dwellings), and Redlands (150 dwellings). Assessment of Traffic Impact

Vyne Park Access Junctions – assessments undertaken for both accesses show that in 2023 and with the development’s traffic the two junctions will operate well within capacity.

Crockford Lane/Lime Tree Way Roundabout – assessment shows that this junction will operate within capacity in 2023 with the proposed development.

Cufaude Lane/Hanmore Road/ Crockford Lane Roundabout – assessment shows that this junction will operate within capacity in 2023 with the proposed development.

Gaiger Avenue/A33 Roundabout – this junction was assessed in two scenarios. Firstly, in relation to the permitted scheme to be delivered by the Redlands development, and secondly the HCC potential upgrade scheme. Further information was requested from the applicant in relation to what the HCC potential upgrade scheme is delivering and where the modelling files have been obtained from. The applicant submitted further information in a Transport Addendum. This clarified that there is no HCC potential improvement scheme for this roundabout. The agreed assessment for this roundabout is therefore the ‘Permitted Roundabout Scheme’ (to be delivered by the Redlands development) modelling which shows that this junction will operate within capacity in the 2023 future year scenario.

Thornhill Way/A33 Signalised Cross Roads Junction – this has been modelled using the existing signal timings as well as optimised signal timings. This junction will operate well over capacity in the future year peak hours, particularly when assessed with development traffic. HCC have recently implemented improvements to this junction and the applicant was required to confirm whether these improvements had been accounted for in the modelling. As part of the further information submitted in the Transport Addendum, modelling files for this improvement scheme were provided and this shows that the junction will operate within capacity on all arms in the 2023 future year scenario.

Binfields Roundabout – the applicant used the HCC Binfields Roundabout Design LINSIG model because the junction has recently been improved. As a result of the improvement scheme the signal timings will be regularly optimised to help manage traffic flows through this junction. However, it can be seen from

the modelling that this junction will operate over capacity in the 2023 future year. As development traffic will further reduce this capacity, HCC will seek to secure a financial contribution towards further improvements that will benefit the operation of this junction. The contribution will be based on the proportion of development traffic that will utilise the junction in 2029.

Crockford Roundabout – a HCC design mode was utilised for this roundabout which has recently been improved. The applicant provided modelling for the existing signal timings with optimised timings. It is recognised that as a result of the HCC improvement scheme, the signal timings will regularly optimised to help manage traffic flows through this junction. However, it can be seen from the modelling that this junction will operate over capacity in the 2023 future year. As development traffic will further reduce this capacity, HCC will seek to secure a financial contribution towards further improvements that will benefit the operation of this junction. The contribution will be based on the proportion of development traffic that will utilise the junction in 2029.

A33/A339 Roundabout – the applicant undertook a numerical assessment of development traffic movements towards the A33/A339 signalised junction. This assessment has compared the 2023 baseline traffic volume to the 2023 volume + development traffic. The development is likely to have a 1.5% increase in traffic on this junction in the AM peak and a 2.3% increase in the PM peak. This is considered to be a modest increase in traffic volume and HCC Highways advise that this is not likely to have a considerable impact on the operation of this junction.

Sherfield Park – HCC requested at the pre-application stage that the applicant undertake an assessment of the development’s impact on traffic currently routing through Sherfield Park. As part of the Transport Addendum, the applicant clarified the methodology used to calculate the level of traffic likely to pass through Sherfield Park from the development. 2023 base flows obtained as part of the applicant’s traffic impact assessment, have been utilised for Rockbourne Road. The proposed development traffic has been added to this to calculate the number of vehicle per hour. Given the development’s impact, HCC advise that it is not considered necessary for mitigation to be provided.

To summarise, in considering the impact of traffic generated by this development it was found that only two junctions would operate over capacity in the 2023 future year scenario. Initially HCC Highways considered that financial contributions towards junction improvements was the way forward. However, following further consideration and in light of the junction improvement works already completed HCC Highways have concluded that it would be more appropriate to provide improvements to sustainable transport modes in order to mitigate the impact of the development traffic. This includes the provision of a new bus service which will operate between the proposed development and Basingstoke Town Centre and a contribution towards the Basingstoke Cycle Strategy and specifically towards delivery of Route 1 cycle route.

This approach recognises the limited scope for additional junction capacity improvements on the local highway network, in particular following recent upgrades on the A33. The following has therefore been agreed to directly support the delivery and use of sustainable transport modes to and from the development, and to minimise traffic impact: • A commitment to fund an extension to the Vyne Park bus service into the

proposed development site for an additional 5-year period subject to an annual service review. This can be monitored through the Travel Plan to ensure service provision is appropriate to passenger demand.

• A financial contribution towards Strategic Cycle Route 1 or other measures that support sustainable transport between the site and the town centre.

• A Travel Plan with associated approval fees, monitoring fees and bond. Personal Injury Accident Data (PIA) The originally submitted accident data covered the period from March 2015 to April 2018, but HCC considered this only covered a 3 year period and was considered out of date. As part of the Transport Addendum, the applicant obtained further accident data for a period from May 2013 to April 2015 and this was reviewed alongside the originally submitted data. A total of 61 accidents have occurred within the study area in the last 5 years, 9 of these were severe and there were no recorded fatalities. HCC state that having reviewed these figures the majority of recorded accidents have occurred on the A33 corridor with clusters appearing at the Crockford and Binfields roundabouts. HCC have recently undertaken improvements at both these junctions which change the nature of their operation and subsequently improves safety. The highway authority is satisfied that the proposed development is unlikely to have a severe impact on the safety of the surrounding highway network. Therefore the development is considered to accord with paragraph 109 of the NPPF, Local Plan Policy CN9 and Policy T1 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan. Travel Plan HCC Highway have confirmed that the revised Travel Plan is broadly acceptable, however the questionnaire should be improved. The Travel Plan will be secured through the section 106 agreement together with appropriate approval fees, monitoring fees and a bond. Cycle and Car Parking Provision Although this is an outline application, and details such as cycle and car parking provision are not for consideration at this stage, the applicant has confirmed that the development will be in accordance with the Parking SPD.

Paragraph 110(e) of the NPPF states that development should ‘be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations’. The Parking SPD and Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD also make reference to the incorporation of electric vehicle charging points within the development. The applicant’s Transport Assessment has also confirmed that the reserved matters application(s) will include the provision for active and passive electric vehicle charging points. Condition 23 requires each phase to be accompanied by a scheme for the provision of electric vehicle charging points. Biodiversity Issues The application was supported by an Ecological Assessment and during the course of the application the following additional documents were submitted:

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal

Phase 2 Ecological Surveys

Outline Ecological Enhancement and Management Strategy (including Biodiversity Impact Assessment)

Technical Briefing Note – Supplementary Information to Address Biodiversity Team Comments (dated 17/07/2019)

Toad Mitigation Option Study and Proposed Strategy The submitted documents identify a variety of faunal use on the site including bats, badgers, dormouse, reptiles, birds and amphibians. - Bats Moderate levels of foraging and commuting were found throughout the site, with a concentration of activity along hedgerows and tree lines. Inspections of the farm buildings showed no evidence of roosting bats. The original Ecoulis Phase 2 Ecological Survey considered that building 2 had a low potential for roosting bats. It is noted that although the Bat Conservation Guidelines recommend a single survey for bats in instances where a building has ‘low’ potential, the application of the guidelines are based on the discretion of the ecologist. In this instance, the potential roost features are restricted to the use of the external features, such as tiles, which are only likely to support small numbers of bats. It is extremely unlikely that there would be a maternity roost in the building. The Biodiversity Officer has confirmed that although it goes against best practice and advice in Circular 06/2005 it is necessary to consider if, in the unlikely event bats were found to be using the building to be demolished, whether mitigation would be possible to maintain the species concerned at ‘favourable conservation status’. Such mitigation would involve the provision of access to crevices to replace those lost on the building to be demolished and the provision of additional bat boxes. The Biodiversity Officer has confirmed that given the options available for mitigation then, considering a worst case scenario of bats being discovered, the officer is satisfied that a sufficient level of mitigation can be put in place to ensure that there will be no detriment to the maintenance of crevice dwelling bat populations at a favourable conservation status. A condition to ensure such survey work is

undertaken and the results used to design an appropriate mitigation scheme if needs be, is therefore imposed under condition 37. The recommendations for a further bat survey as set out in the updated phase 2 report, is considered adequate to ensure no adverse impact on roosting bats. The applicant has also stated that a pre-dawn survey would be carried out on a precautionary basis, and that such surveys could be carried out at the detailed stage. This would ensure that bats are safeguarded and that no offence is committed under relevant legislation. Such surveys are secured under condition 35. - Badgers The original Ecoulis Preliminary Ecological Appraisal identified the location and status of setts which were recorded at that time and this is reflected in the Updated Phase 2 Ecological Surveys. Whilst no evidence of badgers was recorded during the original June 2018 survey, evidence was recorded of badger activity in April 2019. Badgers are dynamic animals and levels of badger activity can change over time. As a result, a further survey was carried out June 2019. This established that the central burrow was no longer present and that the burrow to the western boundary was disused. It was also confirmed current foraging opportunities within the site are limited to the hedgerow corridors and arable field margins. The hedgerow corridors will be retained on site and the creation of the ‘wildlife area’ to the north of the proposed development provides additional potential badger foraging habitat. As a result the Biodiversity Officer has confirmed that previous concerns relating to badgers have now been addressed. Given levels of badger activity can change over time it will be important to resurvey for them ahead of the proposed works so that appropriate mitigation measures can be provided if necessary ahead of works commencing. This is set out in the recommendations of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and the mitigation measures in the Outline Ecological Enhancement and Management Strategy (including Biodiversity Impact Assessment). Such surveys are secured under condition 35. Such updated surveys should be submitted with each reserved matters application given the dynamic manner in which badgers use land. It should be noted a licence from Natural England would be required to close down any active badger setts on site. - Dormice Dormice are known to use the central hedgerow through the site, with potentially one breeding pair being recorded in one location of the site, with hedgerow habitats being generally very poor. All the hedgerows will be retained on site but with three sections being removed. Two of these sections would be along the southern boundary to accommodate the two proposed access points. The third would be within an internal hedgerow near the middle of the site. To mitigate these losses the applicant is proposing the retention and enhancement by gapping up or thickening by increasing the width of the hedgerows using a range

of native shrub species. New areas of habitat will also be created, with tree and shrub planting within the wildlife area in the north, and creation of a new habitat corridor along the route of the Roman Road. The inclusion of thorn species within the mix is intended to deter predation from cats. In relation to the width of the buffer zone surrounding the central hedgerow, the Outline Ecological Enhancement Plan shows a buffer zone and the applicant has confirmed that this would be 10m buffers on either side of the hedge. The Biodiversity Officer has requested that larger buffers are provided, although acknowledges that the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD only requires 20m as a minimum and accepts that to ask for greater buffers would not warrant a refusal. Each reserved matters application would be supported by a suitable Landscape Planting Plan together with a detailed Ecological Enhancement and Management Plan. More naturalistic hedgerow planting through the centre of the site, including trees will provide canopy height into which dormice can retreat. It is also proposed to reinforce the southern boundary to provide additional connectivity with the SW corner, and further links to woodland beyond. To retain habitat connectivity across the western most access road into the site, it is proposed to install a dormouse bridge, which would connect the canopies of mature trees on either side of the road. It is important for this bridge and supplemental planting to be implemented prior to any development occurring on site to ensure that the impact of the development on the dormouse population is limited. This approach is supported by the Biodiversity Officer. The provision of the dormouse bridge will be controlled by condition 33. In relation to the central hedgerow within the site a dormouse ‘hop-over’ is proposed where the road would breach the hedge. The road would be narrowed locally by using a build-out, and a larger tree stock planted on either side so that the tree canopies will join over the top of the highway. This would be coupled with dropped kerbs or a raised section of highway to ensure that there are no barriers to dormouse movement at ground level. This approach is supported by the Biodiversity Officer. This approach is supported by the Biodiversity Officer. The exact details will be secured by condition 34. The Biodiversity Officer has confirmed that a dormouse European Protected Species licence will be required in order for the works to proceed due to the presence of one confirmed breeding pair and removal of dormouse habitat. An EPS licence can only be granted if the development proposal is able to meet three tests: 1. the consented operation must be for ‘preserving public health or public safety

or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment’; (Regulation 53(2)(e))

2. there must be ‘no satisfactory alternative’ (Regulation 53(9)(a)); and 3. the action authorised ‘will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the

population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range’ (Regulation 53(9)(b)).

Section 3 of the submitted Technical Briefing Note describes the mitigation measures that will be taken in terms of the dormouse population present on site so that the action authorised ‘will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range’ in order to meet Reg 53(9)(b) of the Habitat Regulations. It is for Natural England to determine if this particular test has been met or not. Sections 3.11 and 3.12 of the Technical Briefing Note give further details on how the remaining two tests of the Habitat Regulations have been met. Namely, that the site is an allocated site (test 2 – no satisfactory alternative), and with regards to test 1 it is considered that bringing the site forward for housing in light of the lack of housing supply is grounds for overriding public interest. In addition, the school site is of public interest. - Reptiles Reptile surveys carried out in 2018 identified a small population of grass snake located mainly in the northern parts of the site. The Phase 2 Ecological Surveys provide recommendations to ensure reptiles are safeguarded during development and this would be secured by condition 35. - Birds A total of 38 species of breeding bird were recorded within the site, the majority of which are common species. A total of 7 priority species were also found on site, including skylarks, linnets, cuckoo, yellowhammer, house sparrow, song thrush and starling. New areas of wildlife planting are proposed in the northern area of open green space and around the attenuation basins. The 10m buffers along all hedgerows will be planted with wildflower species and will be subject to minimal management. These areas will also be protected from disturbance from domestic cats through the planting of thorny species. A variety of bird boxes will also be installed throughout the site to enhance nesting opportunities for a variety of bird species. The initial Ecolusis Phase 2 Survey identified up to 10 individual skylark, however following a request for further clarification on whether these represented breeding territories a further detailed interpretation of bird survey data was carried out. As a result of this more detailed interpretation it was estimated that there were between 4-6 breeding pairs. An additional Skylark Distribution Plan has been provided to consolidate the results of the likely breeding territories. This is consistent with published figures for typical breeding densities for skylark of approximately 0.2-0.3/ha in arable fields under conventional management. On this basis it would suggest between 4.6 to 6.9 territories. It should be noted that breeding success of skylark in arable settings can vary greatly depending on the cropping regime with winter sown crops often becoming too tall to allow successful breeding. With regards to the development proposals, the approach to habitat provision for skylark is through the provision of 1ha of semi-natural grassland within the wildlife area. Defined paths will be mown to encourage use in some areas, with larger areas

set aside for bird nesting. Interpretation boards are also proposed which will provide information to residents of the possible presence of ground nesting birds. No skylark plots are proposed, because this approach would tend to be used in an arable conservation management scenario, which is not appropriate in this instance. Assuming a typical skylark breeding density, the applicant considers that this approach to mitigation is estimated as having potential to deliver sufficient habitat for one breeding pair. It is acknowledged that it will not be possible to maintain the current skylark population within the site, and the proposals would potentially result in a minor decrease in the local population. However, the applicant states that the proposals seek to achieve an overall net gain in terms of bird assemblage. Bird usage of the remaining parts of the site (houses and gardens) is expected to increase, including Priority declining urban species such as house sparrow and swift. Significant enhancements for birds have also been proposed in the Ecological Enhancement Strategy, and there is expected to be a net gain in bird overall populations. The Biodiversity Officer is sceptical that the provision of habitat provision in the semi-natural grassland will be successful despite the developers best intentions. However, the officer considers that instead, the scheme will seek to provide a net gain in other bird assemblages by providing nesting options for passerine species, swifts, swallows and house martins through the installation of appropriate nest boxes. From this perspective it could be argued there will be an overall net gain in bird populations even if unfortunately this will be at the expense of the current skylark population on site. The conditioned Habitat Enhancement Plan should include the specific measures that will be undertaken to compensate this loss (see condition 36). - Amphibians

The application was supported by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, a Phase 2 ecological Survey and a Great Crested Newt Population Monitoring Survey. Following concerns raised at an early stage of the application, the developer sought further ecological advice in relation to the impact on the proposed development on the Common Toad population in the vicinity. Toads are known to cross Upper Cufaude Lane during early spring on their annual migration from their overwintering habitats to breeding ponds. Cufaude Lane is the site of a registered toad crossing. Ten mitigation options for toad mitigation on Cufaude Lane were compared as part of the submitted option study, all aimed at reducing the negative impacts of traffic on toads. Advantages and disadvantages of each were considered, in terms of how practical they are to implement, their effectiveness over the long-term or short-term, requirements for third party consents or agreements, and whether they would have any knock-on effects. This was also informed by an engineering feasibility study carried out by the applicant. As a result of these studies, the applicant is proposing one toad tunnel located at the central ‘hotspot’ location where significant toad crossings were noted. The verges at this location are wide enough to allow for the installation of the tunnel, and existing ditches are present which could be modified to create guide ditches.

The accompanying traffic data projects five day average two way traffic movements along Cufaude Lane between 0700 and 2000, represent a 2.4% increase compared with the baseline traffic. Most toads begin to move across the road at dusk or shortly after dark, with the overall period of migration continuing into the night. During the period between 1700 and 1800 there are estimated to be an additional three traffic movements which result directly from the proposed development. This provides a 1.7% increase when compared to the baseline traffic movements. It is noted that some objections relate to the need for more than one toad tunnel. However, in considering the proposals one can only consider any increase in traffic as a direct result of the proposed development and any measures proposed must be proportionate to this increase in traffic. It would be unreasonable to secure measures to address an existing situation caused by existing traffic levels. It should be noted that both Natural England and the Biodiversity Officer support the provision of one tunnel. The toad tunnel and maintenance of the tunnel will therefore be secured through the section 106 legal agreement. The tunnel should be in place before any dwelling approved at Upper Cufaude Lane is occupied, this is because it is the occupation of these additional dwellings which would result in the projected 2.4% traffic increase along Upper Cufaude Lane. The provision of the inclusion of the toad tunnel is welcomed by the Biodiversity Officer, and requests that monitoring the success of the toad tunnel should also be a part of the section 106 agreement. Landscape The application site is situated to the north of Basingstoke, within a rural context, immediately north of the Razors Farm development, and west of Cufaude Lane. Policy SS3.8 of the Local Plan and Policy D2 of the Bramley NP, require the development to retain existing the landscape and vegetation structure in and around the site. Development Principle 3a of the Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief reiterates this, and goes on to state that existing features should be properly utilised within the overall design and layout to ensure a high quality of design and sense of place. The SPD also states that opportunities should be taken to provide additional planting which should have a rural character, and utilises native species to reflect the character of the area. Development Principle 3a(d) states that the open space to the northern end of the site needs to be naturalistic in character, which responds positively to the rural context and the nearby heritage assets and their settings. The application has been supported by a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA), which states that as shown in the illustrative master plan the vast majority of the trees and hedgerows would be retained. Vehicular access would result in the loss of one tree along the southern boundary where the new development would connect to the Razors Farm development. There would also be minimal loss of hedgerows between the different areas due to the proposed road network. The LVIA goes on to state that the loss of these features would be more than compensated for by the proposed tree and hedgerow planting within and on the boundaries of the site.

This includes tree planting within the proposed open space in the north western area of the site, along the streets within the site and along the linear park to the southwest which would line to the route of the Roman road within Razors Farm. New hedgerows are proposed along Cufaude Lane, with an area of open space between the new hedgerow and the existing one along Cufaude Lane. The LVIA concludes that the development would contribute to a net increase in tree and hedgerow cover, representing a direct benefit to the site as well as an indirect benefit to the wider landscape character of the area. The proposal submitted is outline with all matters reserved except for access. The Landscape Officer raises no objection to the overall layout, but has commented on a number of matters of detail. As stated previously, this application is in outline and the submitted plans are indicative. The comments raised by the Landscape Officer would be addressed at the reserved matters stage associated with each of the phases. The Landscape Officer supports the provision of the main northern open space, stating that the series of mown and informal paths indicated within this open space are welcomed as part of the aspiration for this area, which will undoubtedly be well used. The Landscape Officer states that one circular route will be required to be surfaced in order to provide an 'all weather' option for site users, safe for buggies, mobility scooters and wheelchairs. Such details would be considered as part of the subsequent reserved matter application for this area. The Landscape Officer also advises that the path within the open space, which it is intended will form part of the cycle network extension, should form part of this surfaced circular route, and that it should also extend out to Cufaude Lane to the north, and down past the MUGAs and Community Centre parking area to the main road to the south. Such details would be secured as part of a subsequent reserved matter application. The principle of the provision of the community hall, MUGA, LEAP and parking are supported by both the Landscape Officer and the Community Development officer. However, the exact positioning of each of these uses will be addressed at the reserved matter stage. If should be noted that an informative will be added to advise the developer that the LEAP needs access to the open space but also needs to be overlooked. In relation to the proposed storey heights, the Landscape Officer notes that the majority of the character areas within the site allow for more than 2 storeys in key locations. The Landscape Officer has raised concerns about the provision of any building heights taller than 3 storeys outside the central core of the site. The edges of the site along Cufaude Lane and to the west would be particularly sensitive to taller storey heights due to the immediate rural context, and to the north of the site there are sensitivities in relation to the heritage asset of Upper Cufaude Farm. The Upper Cufaude Lane SPD states under Principle 5a (Good urban design principles) criteria (f), that the scale of the proposed buildings should generally not exceed 2 storeys and never exceed 2 and a half storeys (i.e. 2 storey development with accommodation in the roof space). Any future reserved matter application will

need to comply with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. The applicants Design and Access Statement also makes clear that areas identified as ‘enhanced storey height dwellings’ would be through a reserved matters application. The Landscape Officer has noted that in places, the development appears to be extending close to the existing vegetation at the edge of the site. This is particularly the case to the south west. This could have adverse impacts on existing trees and structural vegetation along these site boundaries. Such issues are dealt with in the Tree Section in this report. Adjacent to Cufaude Lane, there may be the need for additional structural vegetation to be planted in order to buffer and soften the impacts of the increased built form within the site. This will become more apparent at the next stage of the development, but the applicant should be mindful of this potential likelihood at this stage to ensure that it is addressed at the reserved matters stage. The Landscape Officer has made a number of detailed comments on the illustrative master plan, such as in relation to parking courts and areas prone to indiscriminate parking. These are to be considered at the reserved matters stage. A landscape management plan would be secured through the section 106 agreement which would secure the landscape framework and landscape maintenance for the overall site. Details of soft and hard landscaping would be considered under future reserved matter applications. This is secured under condition 9. All of the issues identified in relation to the Landscape Officer’s response are considered relevant to the assessment of this application. Therefore the proposed development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies SS3.8 and EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D2. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD. Design The Upper Cufaude Farm SPD under Development Principle 5a states that:

a) The design needs to respond positively and creatively to the site’s opportunities and constraints in order to create a high quality development with a strong sense of place, which will need to be heavily informed by the site’s rural context.

b) The site will need to have a coherent, permeable, legible layout, which reflects the rural context, and provide for a spacious development with a low intensity character (eg. by having a rural character and a strong landscape framework).

c) The development should have well-defined streets, and ensure the provision of a high quality public realm.

d) The development should have an attractive relationship with the open space provided within the layout and needs to be sympathetic to how it will appear from key views into the site.

Criteria e) – h) refer to matters of detail which would need to be adhered to as part of any future reserved matters application. In support of the application a Design and Access Statement was submitted which contains a series of Parameter Plans, namely:

Land Use

Character Areas

Access and Movement

Open Spaces and Play Areas

Scale This approach is welcomed, and the Urban Design Officer confirms that there are no objections to the content of these Parameter Plans and states that they will provide a structure for future reserved matters applications. Of particular importance, the following aspects are common to many of the Parameter Plans:

The location of the school in the central southern part of the site, which will minimise distances for pupils walking to school.

The school’s location with its extensive playing fields will introduce a welcome area of open space in the central, southern part of the site providing visual relief from the urbanisation of the housing.

The use of the Roman Road as a walking route will enhance the character and the enjoyment of the pedestrian network of the scheme.

The main open space in the north of the site will help ease the transition to the countryside to the north and is in accordance with criterion (e) of Policy SS3.8 of the Local Plan and the accompanying Inset Map. The location of this open space will complement the siting of the neighbouring Community Centre and play facilities.

The two main access routes from Vyne Park to the south provide a clear, direct and legible route through to the rest of the development.

The street network creates a series of perimeter blocks which look out to the edges and main spaces of the development. This takes the opportunity to offer most houses a pleasant view of the countryside around the site or of open spaces, playing fields and green buffers. The occasional bends and curves in the street network introduce an informality to the layout which complements its edge of countryside location.

The ‘urban squares’ such as those between parcels A and B and between parcels M and L will enhance the legibility of the scheme and break up these areas of housing to improve the streetscene.

- Land Use The submitted indicative Land Use plan identifies a central location for the reserved school site on the southern boundary of the site. This is as indicated on the Indicative Development Framework Plan included within the adopted SPD. Detailed

comments on the location of the proposed school site are considered under the ‘Provision of School’ section in this report. The Urban Design officer has questioned the locations of the proposed Park and Stride facilities and whether they are correctly located to encourage their use. These locations have been agreed with Hampshire Highways. It is considered that these locations are well connected to the proposed school site through the proposed footpath network and as such will be well used by future parents. It should be noted that if HCC chose Upper Cufaude Farm as its preferred location for the school, as part of any future reserved matters application details ensuring the school site connects with the footpath and cycle network would be for consideration. The Land Use Parameter Plan also identifies an area to the north of the site adjacent to area of open space, for a community hall, MUGA and a LEAP as well as associated parking. The location of these facilities is dealt with later in this report, however the principle of this location for community uses is supported and would also utilise the area of open space to the north. - Character Areas The Design and Access Statement states that to ensure the current application links to the Razors Farm development to the south, yet has its own identity in its own right, the concept of character areas will be carried forward to the application site. However, the character areas identified are specific to the Upper Cufaude Farm site and express a more rural feel at the edge of the settlement. The Design and Access Statement identifies four character areas as follows:

Main Street – (density 25-35 dwellings/ha) this would continue the wide road width which begins in Razors Farm, and this will also accommodate the extension of the proposed bus route. On the western boundary and for the first section of the eastern access the development will be single sided to give a more rural character at the entry to the layout.

Village Housing – (density 30-37 dwellings/ha) these form the core of the layout and will connect the main street housing with the perimeter housing. The types of dwellings would be typically terraced with ‘consistent well-proportioned forms set under long barn-style roofs.’ Greens – (density 20-25 dwellings/ha) this relates to the green to the north of the site next to the community hall. It is identified as having a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced forms in a formal setting to define this space. Green Edges – (density 20-25 dwellings/ha) detached and semi-detached properties would predominate. On the eastern boundary the form is generally with short drives serving two or three dwellings, overlooking a new swale and open space buffer between the housing and Cufaude Lane.

It is considered that these areas extend the character and patter of development of Razors Farm in a comprehensive and successful fashion.

- Access and Movement

Many of the aspects of the Access and Movement Parameter Plan are supported in urban design terms including:

a clear main loop for vehicles and buses which connects the main streets, the school and community centre;

cycle routes which offer a network through the site and connections to National Cycle Network 23; proposed informal paths which enable a leisure route around the site; and

a hierarchy of main and secondary streets and lanes which help to create a legible and permeable set of routes.

The existing public footpath to the south of the site would be maintained with links connecting into the site, particularly utilising the route of the roman road and both the east and west boundaries of the site. - Open Spaces and Play Areas The provision of open space and play areas is dealt with in more detail elsewhere in this report. - Scale Criterion (m) of Policy SS3.8 of the Local Plan requires the proposal to provide for a comprehensive development with Razors Farm to the south through a joint masterplan. In purely urban design terms, the submitted material provides for this and a joint masterplan is therefore unnecessary. The two main vehicular accesses extend from the main vehicular routes through Vyne Park/Razors Farm in a direct and permeable fashion. The pattern of development described in the Character Areas Parameter Plan suitably complements the character of Vyne Park. There is no objection to the planning application’s proposed capacity of up to 350 dwellings on this western parcel of the allocation site. The Planning Statement refers to how a capacity of 350 units on the application site would have an average housing density of 29 dwellings per hectare. Such a density is considered appropriate in this location. It will lend the scheme a typical suburban character of a mix of mainly 2-storey flats, terraced, semi-detached and detached houses with the occasional 2.5 storey unit and with enough space for a front garden bounded by a hedge along the back of the pavement as shown in the Open Spaces Parameter Plan. This also meets criteria f) of Development Principle 5a within the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. The illustrative ‘Scale’ plan shows how this capacity would involve the vast majority of dwellings being 2 storeys in height. This would be commensurate with the desired overall suburban character on this edge of countryside location. Some 2.5 storey elements could assist the creation of a successful and legible townscape, such as around the urban square between parcels L and M. It is also the case, that the precise siting of any 2.5 storey elements can help to minimise any visual impact they

may have on the wider area. For example, the potential 2.5 storey elements around the urban square between parcels L and M would be set away from the site edges and be behind an array of other buildings, which would limit their impact on longer distance views. However, such details would be for consideration at the reserved matters application stage. In addition to the above, the adopted SPD seeks to ensure a high quality of development in terms of its design. The submitted Design and Access Statement states that materials and specific architectural details will play an important role in defining character. The development will seek to create a distinctive style while harmonising with both established and new communities. The Design and Access Statement recognises the considerable variety of materials and details within Bramley such as:

Red facing brickwork – plain and herringbone pattern

Plain tile roofing

Plain and ornamental tile hanging

Generous porches

A variety of window glazing bar styles

Gable and hipped roofs with open eaves

Bay windows

Black timber boarding The Urban Design Officer has commented that it is noticeable that the current outline application has incorporated detailed Parameter Plans, and that it is not therefore necessary to require an intermediate design code stage to ensure a high quality of structure, layout or appearance. These Parameter Plans will be secured by condition (see condition 1) and will ensure the control over the appearance of the housing elevations to be exercised at reserved matters stage, will enable a high standard of design quality to be achieved for a development on this site. The proposed development are in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D2. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. Heritage Issues Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 places a duty on Local Planning Authorities to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building, or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest it possesses. Section 16 of the NPPF and Policy EM11 of the Local Plan seek to ensure that development conserves or enhances heritage assets (including below ground assets) requiring development to respect the historic form, setting and significance of a heritage asset, and requiring appropriate design and detailing.

Policy SS3.8 c), states that the development should conserve and enhance the architectural and historic significance of heritage assets in the area including Razors Farm, Upper Cufaude Farm, Cufaude Farm and the Vyne. Development Principle 4 of the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD states that the development should respond positively to the constraints and opportunities presented by the historic environment. Development Principle 4 c) also states that the development should protect the line and archaeology of the Roman road. A comprehensive heritage statement has been submitted with the application and this discusses the significance and impact of proposals on heritage assets, including Grade I and II listed buildings (notably at Upper Cufaude Farm (Grade II) and The Vyne (Grade I and Grade II)) and a landscape on the Register of Parks and Gardens (The Vyne (Grade II)). It is acknowledged within the heritage statement at 7.11 that the scheme will cause less than substantial harm to heritage assets by virtue of development within the setting of buildings at Upper Cufaude Farm. Such harm should carry considerable weight when weighed against public benefits. The Conservation Officer was involved with the preparation of the Development Brief SPD for the site. This, inter alia, endeavours to ensure appropriate mitigation of harm to heritage assets. In raising no objections to the proposal on heritage grounds, the Conservation Officer states that it is noted that green space is shown on the plan between the built up area of the development and Cufaude Farm, where there are a number of listed buildings. The Conservation Officer also states that it is important that the green space here has a semi-rural, undeveloped character. Such details would be secured as part of any future reserved matters application. In relation to this area, Historic England have also stated that ‘the illustrative lay out indicates that our concern for the setting of the listed buildings at Upper Cufaude Farm (immediately to the north of the site) has been taken on board. The development has been pulled back from the boundary of the site at the north end and opposite the farmstead thereby protecting the historic functional relationship between the historic farm buildings and the surrounding farmland. This is welcomed’. Historic England goes on to state that the LVIA and the Heritage Assessment indicate that there is no inter-visibility between this site and the farmstead at Cufaude Farm which includes a moated site which is a scheduled monument. The lack of inter-visibility as well as the intervening distance suggests that the development is unlikely to have any effect on the significance of these heritage assets. The Conservation Officer comments that the Roman road has the potential to make a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the proposed development; this is dealt with in the Archaeology section of this report. The Vyne (Grade I) and its registered park and garden (Grade II) is over a mile away from the site and there are no planned views or vistas across to the site. However, the 17th century garden pavilion had an upper floor suggesting that was used as a

viewing platform, and there is the possibility that there is some inter-visibility between this grade II building and the site. Following comments raised by Historic England that neither the LVIA nor the Heritage Assessment addressed this potential, the applicant has submitted further information to address these comments. This included drone photography to replicate the view over the landscape eastwards towards the development site from the first floor pavilion. This indicates that there would have been no views of the development. In light of this additional information, Historic England have confirmed that the development would have no impact or a negligible impact upon the significance of the pavilion, and therefore raise no objection to the proposal on heritage grounds. The points raised in the consultation responses from the Conservation Officer and Historic England are accepted in assessing the proposed development therefore meeting the requirements of the NPPF (in particular paragraph nos. 190, 192-194 and 196), and the proposals are in accordance with Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D1. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD and the Heritage SPD. Archaeology Development Principle 4 of the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD states that the development should respond positively to the constraints and opportunities presented by the historic environment. Development Principle 4 c) also states that the development should protect the line and archaeology of the Roman road. As part of the application, the applicant has submitted an archaeological desk based assessment and the archaeological evaluation report which have been considered by the County Archaeologist. The County Archaeologist welcomes the fact that the illustrative layout has been influenced by the line of the Roman Road which crosses the site, and that this would be retained as part of the character of the development. It is considered that in the future this should lend some sense of place and community to the residents. It should be noted that as part of the development to the south at Razors Farm (through which the line of the Roman Road runs), interpretation boards will be provided to provide residents with a sense of place and historic understanding of the area. The Borough Conservation Officer also welcomes the fact that the road has shaped the illustrative masterplan and that the proposal affords increased opportunities for the appreciation of a non-designated heritage asset. However, the Conservation Officer has commented that the development is shown closer to the line of the Roman road than is desirable, and notes that there is a greater distance to the route of the Roman Road in the neighbouring Razors Farm development. It should be noted that the masterplan is illustrative only, and provides an indication of how the site will be developed. The exact location of the development in relation to the route of the Roman Road would be considered in more detail under the subsequent

relevant reserved matters application. It should also be noted that the route of the Roman Road in the neighbouring development (Razors Farm), is substantially treed and is a designated SINC and therefore there was a greater distance requirement due to the tree/SINC buffers. With the current application site there is no such delineation. The County Archaeologist states that the site does have some archaeological potential and this has been partially explored by the archaeological evaluation. Although the sample of the evaluation is lower than would normally be recommended, the County Archaeologist states that ‘the largely negative result does suggest that a ‘reasonable’ approach would accept that the archaeological potential is low’. However it was noted that some areas were not evaluated at all, and it is therefore recommended that these areas are subject to archaeological evaluation where they are impacted by development. It should be noted that in some areas the unevaluated elements coincide with proposed open space and provided that open space does not involve ground disturbance of any scale, further evaluation would not be necessary. The evaluation did encounter some evidence for the Roman road, and although the line of the Roman road is retained within the layout of the development there are areas where the development does impact that line (eg swales). The County Archaeologist therefore recommends that an archaeological excavation take place at a such a location over the line of the Roman road to establish its date and character. The County Archaeologist therefore raise not objection subject to archaeological condition to secure the completion of the archaeological evaluation (see condition 24), and also a condition secure appropriate archaeological mitigation arising out of the results of the archaeological evaluation (condition 25). In so far as the evaluation has been completed to date this would include an archaeological excavation on the line of the Roman road to establish its date and character. Some additional archaeological work might arise from the additional evaluation results where the evaluation is completed. The provision of interpretation boards in relation to the route of the Roman road, will also be secured by condition (condition 26). The proposed development therefore meets the requirements of the NPPF (in particular paragraph nos. 190, 192-194 and 196), and the proposals are in accordance with Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D1. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD and the Heritage SPD. Trees As stated above both the Local Plan, Neighbourhood Plan, the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD seek to ensure the retention of existing trees. The submitted LVIA also states that the majority of trees would be retained within the proposed development.

The illustrative masterplan demonstrates the retention of many of the trees on the site, with the exception of T25 and T30, both removed to facilitate access from the south (eastern access point). It should be noted that the western of the two access points linking to Razors Farm (Vyne Park) has been approved as part of the Phase 1 consent (15/02513/RES) which showed two oak trees being removed. The plan was also a requirement of condition 14 of that consent in order to safeguard access to the current application site. The trees at this point have been removed. Following concerns in relation to the to the removal of T25 and T30 further information has been received and the Tree Officer is satisfied that the removal of T30 is accepted, however concerns still remain in relation to the removal of T25 which is a category A tree. Such trees should only be removed where the need for development clearly outweighs the loss of such trees and adequate mitigation can be provided. The Tree Officer acknowledges that given the site is allocated within the local plan and the development brief identifies access from Razors Farm, there is clearly a need for the development in this area. The Tree Officer has also confirmed that given the area of public open space to the north of the site, there will be satisfactory mitigation to offset the loss of this tree. Concerns were originally raised in relation to a field oak tree located within the site (south of the indicative location for the community hall), and although shown as retained the proximity of the indicative housing to the east were too close. Further information and site assessment has confirmed that the extent of the canopy was larger than originally shown. Notwithstanding this, the illustrative masterplan has been amended to set back the buildings to the east an acceptable distance. As previously stated, while the master plan is purely indicative this amendment does show that the tree can be retained and the dwellings still provided. Concerns were initially raised in relation to the southern boundary and the proximity of development in relation to the SINC woodlands to the south of the site (within the Razors Farm development). Amendments to the illustrative masterplan have removed the road wrapping round the corner, with this area now shown as landscaped with additional tree planting. The proximity of the road in indicative Housing Area A is still to close to the buffer zone around the western SINC on the southern boundary. Due to the indicative nature of the proposals conditions 31 and 32 are proposed to ensure the reserved matter applications follow the advice in the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD and the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. An informative (number 4) also advised the applicant of the need to amend the detailed design. The separation between the tree lines around the perimeter of the site and the proposed development are acceptable with good access for future maintenance and a considered orientation with private amenity spaces, allowing for adequate sun and daylight. Further, more detailed comments have been raised by the Tree Officer in relation to individual trees but bearing in mind the master plan is illustrative only and the application is to establish the principle of development of up to 350 dwellings with only access for consideration, then such matters would be considered in more

detailed at the relevant reserved matters stage. At such point, more detailed survey and layout plans would be under consideration. Open Spaces/Green Infrastructure Policy SS3.8 criteria e) requires the area to the northwest portion of the site to be kept free from development and roads, providing only additional landscape and appropriate open space measures to ensure sufficient mitigation of the development on the surrounding area, and this is reiterated in the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. The SPD states that the quantum of open space provided will need to encompass a minimum of 6ha, made up of amenity space suitable for kickabout, accessible natural green space and park, plus 486sqm of equipped play space (LEAP). The green spaces should be linked to each other, and to the new and existing housing areas by safe pedestrian and cycle routes. The SPD also states that the development should ensure that the green spaces are well related to other community facilities, such as ‘spill-out’ space for the community centre. The SPD also recommends that the kickabout space and sports facilities are provided in close proximity to the community centre. This has been addressed in the Landscape section above. The indicative master plan and supporting Design and Access Statement, ensure that the northwest part of the site is retained as open space in accordance with the Policy SS3.8 of the Local Plan and the SPD. The D&A states that the design of the layout from the outset has always been landscape-led with the result that open space provision has exceeded the standards required by the adopted Green Space Standards. In relation to on-site open space The Parks and Open Space Officer has stated that because of the lack of existing MFGS and equipped play that can accommodate the needs of the additional residents within the adopted distance thresholds, all MFGS and equipped play required to meet the Green Space Quantity Standard must be provided on site, made up of kickabout space, accessible natural greenspace and park and a Local Play Area (LEAP), meeting the adopted distance thresholds in the Green Space Standards. The D&A states that the absolute minimum standards for amenity green space and accessible natural green space is 20m²per person, with a preferred standard of 65m² recommended. On the basis of 2.4 persons per dwelling, 350 dwellings would equate to 840 people. The open space range would therefore be between 1.68ha to 5.46ha. The Parks and Open Space Officer has confirmed this. It should be noted that the total open space provision proposed is 8.14ha, however some of this is below the minimum required width of 15m. The developer has therefore adjusted this figure to include only land over 15m in width and the total would be 7.52ha which would be an overprovision of 2.06ha. The northern area of open space would have a gross area of 4.59ha, with a net figure of 4.13ha omitting the attenuation ponds. This is double the size of a neighbourhood park, which is normally 2ha.

The indicative proposals show a large open space to the north which provides space for kickabout, accessible natural green space and park features. In addition there are green spaces shown in the south west of the site and in front of the community hall which also contribute to the requirements for MFGS. The eastern and western boundaries include informal footpaths and have the potential to contribute to the MFGS requirement subject to detailed design. The Parks and Open Space Officer states that the detailed design of all MFGS will need to be approved as part of future reserved matter applications, and that such submissions should ensure that all MFGS must be overlooked to ensure natural surveillance. Therefore the proposed planting between the dwellings and the northern open space must be visually permeable e.g. clear stemmed trees and low shrubs. The Parks and Open Space Officer has confirmed that the proposed location of the LEAP next to the northern open space and the community centre is positive, however the boundary between the open space and the LEAP should be open to allow visibility and easy access between the two. In addition, the LEAP must be overlooked for natural surveillance which is not the case with the current proposal. As stated previously such matters will be dealt with as part of a future reserved matter application in relation to this area. The legal agreement will also secure the provision of the LEAP to the minimum size required. The Parks and Open Space Officer has also confirmed that the distance thresholds are met across the site, apart from the south eastern corner. However, these residents have access to the amenity green space on Razor's Farm as well as the wide buffer and footpath links around the boundary to the northern open space. In order to provide easier access for residents in the south east of the development to the northern open space, the Parks and Open Space Officer has stated that the proposed cycle route along the northern boundary of the school site should also provide a safe pedestrian route to the open space. Such detail would be dealt with under a subsequent reserved matter application. There is no requirement for any Off-site green space contribution because all the required green space is to be provided on site. The proposed development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies SS3.8 and EM5 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D2. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD. Provision of school Policy SS3.8 criteria b) requires the Upper Cufaude Farm development to include the provision of a two form entry primary school if required by the Local Education Authority (LEA). The outline application has identified 2.8ha of the site for the provision of a primary school which would be located centrally within the site towards the southern boundary. Two park and stride areas have also been identified in the indicative master plan, to reduce parking immediately adjacent to the school and to

encourage parents and older pupils to access the school independently from the park and stride sites. The adopted SPD states that the LEA has identified the need for additional primary school places to serve new and existing communities in the eastern areas of Basingstoke, and has stated that provision should be made to meet this requirement on both the Upper Cufaude Farm and East of Basingstoke allocated sites. The LEA expect to require only one of these additional schools. It should be noted that in response to the consultation on this current application, the LEA raises no objection to the proposals in principle. The central location of the reserved school site is in accordance with the Development Framework Plan which is attached to the SPD. In identifying this central location for the school, the SPD states that a central location in the site would ensure that the school would be at the heart of the development, would avoid impacting on the Roman road and Cufaude Lane, and would be well related to the Razors Farm development to the south. HCC Education have confirmed that discussions have taken place with Croudace on the draft masterplan they have produced in relation to this development and comments are also based upon that plan in comparison to the aspirations for design contained in the development brief. The LEA have confirmed that the requirement for a school site on this development is a strategic response to the requirement of the Children’s Services Department of Hampshire County Council to plan for school place as part of its statutory function. A review of pupil forecasts to identify the school place planning strategy for the area is underway and this will inform the requirements for any additional primary school places if they are necessary. In support of the application, the developer has provided a Primary Education Needs Assessment which concludes that by 2025 a need for a 1 FE primary school will arise as a direct result of the cumulative development schemes in north west Basingstoke, including the Upper Cufaude Farm site. The allocation of a new primary school within the site would meet the needs of the incoming community. The report also states that a new school on development schemes further east would not meet the needs of the community due to a lower cumulative population, planned expansion of existing schools serving this area, and access issues created by the existing north-south rail line and the A33 road. Whilst the results of the developer’s Primary Education Needs Assessment report are noted, as stated under SPD Development Principle 1c criteria b), the ‘location and size of the school and timing of delivery should be agreed’ with the LEA at the earliest opportunity. The current outline application and supporting documents shows the developer’s intention to accommodate the school on their site, and indeed that it is the better site for a primary school. Notwithstanding this, it is up to the LEA to make the final decision in terms of the location, it is important therefore that this application safeguards land for a primary school site if in the future it is required. The section 106 agreement reflects this. Whilst not objecting to the outline proposals, in their comments on the planning application HCC Education have raised comments in relation to:

Sustainable transport - creating opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport

Health and safety – impact in terms of proximity of school site to highway network.

Sustainable transport In support of the application, the applicant has prepared a sustainable access strategy in discussion with HCC Highways, and this includes the need to ensure the school site is suitably integrated within the site. As stated above the Highway Authority are satisfied that the walking and cycling facilities in the nearby vicinity are safe and suitable to serve the proposed development, as well as the primary school. Embracing the principles of the NPPF, the sustainable access strategy prioritises walking and cycling in the local area, as well as integration with BDBC’s planned strategic cycle network (delivered by CIL). It also allows for an intended extension of a bus loop required for Vyne Park (see Highway section above). In this way bus travel will be easily accessible and attractive for future residents and primary school staff. The developer has given particular focus to connecting with Razors Farm, Sherfield Park and the greater Chineham residential areas to the south-east through the design of a walking and cycle corridor connecting with the Razors Farm provision. It is expected that the majority of primary school pupils will make use of the eastern of the two access roads joined together by a loop through the site. There is also a connection from within the Razors Farm development for both pedestrian and cyclists, across the railway line connecting to the National Cycle Network route no. 23 and the wider Sherfield Park development beyond. Given the direct walking routes enabled by the sustainable access strategy, a school catchment area would be possible within a 1km walk of the safeguarded primary school location (maximum walking time of 11-minutes); although most dwellings (an estimated 951) would be within a 7-minute walk. The developer has confirmed that the Park and Stride locations near to the safeguarded school site have been designed into the layout, which are expected to accommodate all pupil drop off by car (on the basis of a 10% car driver mode share for local primary school travel, and these have been agreed with HCC Highways. In order for the Park and Stride locations to be practically used, access points in to the school grounds which are in close proximity would be beneficial, however this would be a matter for the detailed design stage as part of the reserved matter application.

Health and Safety HCC Education have commented upon the location of the proposed school site in relation to the indicative road network and levels of air pollution which would increase and adversely impact upon pupils health. Due to the indicative location of the reserved school site, the site would only be bounded by one road to the west which would be the loop road serving the

development, a minor estate road serving dwellings to the west is also shown indicatively. It should be noted that the application is accompanied by an Air Quality Assessment (AQA), which states that because HCC Education indicated that air quality at the school site was of particular concern a detailed assessment of the air quality conditions at the worst case locations within the site, has been undertaken. The detailed assessment has demonstrated that pollutant concentrations at worst case locations within the reserved school site ‘will be well below the objectives; air quality will be good and no additional mitigation is necessary’. However the AQA goes on to state that the following best practice measures could be implemented at the design stage for the school to reduce exposure to road traffic pollution even further:

Set back the school buildings and any outdoor play spaces from the proposed estate roads; and

Implement a solid/semi-solid barrier (eg. green barrier) between the proposed estate roads and the school buildings and any outdoor play spaces.

In addition, the provision of two Park and Stride facilities will also help reduce volumes of traffic directly adjacent to the primary school. In addition to the above, the developer also states that the majority of future residents who do drive to work in the AM are expected to utilise the western access to access Crockford Lane and subsequently southbound on the A33 (where most work destinations are accessed by car). This will limit car activity on the eastern access where the safeguarded school site is located.

It should also be noted that the Environmental Health Officer has raised no objection to the proposals in relation to pollution. The proposed development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies SS3.8 and CN6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D2. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. Community hall Policy SS3.8 requires the development of Upper Cufaude Farm to provide a community centre and this is reiterated in the SPD which states that the Infrastructure Delivery Plan states that this will comprise the provision of a 375m² building. Such a facility will also need to be accompanied by associated facilities such as car parking. The supporting Design and Access Statement identifies the provision of land for a community centre with a floor area of 375m² and associated car parking. The Community Development Officer has confirmed that for a development of this size (350 dwellings) there is a requirement to provide on site provision for community facilities. The proposed location of the community centre in the northern part of the

development next to the open space and kickabout areas is acceptable. The Community Development Officer states that ease of accessibility from the residents of the proposed development and Razors Farm is important, to help ensure the communities integrate. In this regard, the tree lined path along the route of the Roman Road is welcomed to help ensure a safe link to the community centre and open space. Concerns were raised by the Parks and Open Spaces officer with regards to the location of the LEAP to the rear of the community building, due to lack of security and overlooking. This has been overcome by ‘handing’ the building and the LEAP. As a result, the community building would have a closer relationship with the open space to the north, but would still be accessible to all residents and in close proximity to the parking area. The LEAP would now be to the front of the site with better overlooking. However, in amending the indicative layout in this location it now results in the LEAP being disconnected from the open space, which was equally considered desirable by the Parks and Open Space officer. The Community Development officer has also confirmed that whilst a road frontage is good for a prominent position to ensure that the facility is easily visible and accessible, it is not essential if it is part of the wider provision for the area. The Community Development officer also states that it is important that the community provision retains open space as a spill out area and that there is room for expansion should this be required in the future As stated previously, this is an outline application with only access for consideration and the master plan is indicative only. However, the provision of the community hall, MUGA, LEAP and associated car parking in proximity with the northern area of open space is supported by the SPD and officers. Therefore, an informative advising the applicant that this area needs to be redesigned as part of any future reserved matter application is proposed. The proposed development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies SS3.8 and CN6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy D2. The proposals are also considered to be in accordance with the Upper Cufaude Farm SPD. Community Infrastructure Requirements Policies CN1, CN6 and CN8 of the Local Plan and the accompanying Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018) seek to ensure that new development does not result in an adverse effect on existing infrastructure, and makes appropriate provision to mitigate documented impacts. The application has been scoped and obligations/contributions are sought towards:

Affordable housing

Landscape Management Plan

Biodiversity enhancements – including provision and maintenance of toad tunnel on Cufaude Lane, and future monitoring

Travel Plan and School Travel Plan

On site open space

Community hall

On site play provision (MUGA and LEAP) Off-site financial provision:

Education

Transport: • To include funding of an extension to the Vyne Park bus service into the

proposed development site for an additional 5-year period subject to an annual service review. To be monitored through the Travel Plan to ensure service provision is appropriate to passenger demand.

• A financial contribution towards Strategic Cycle Route 1 or other measures that support sustainable transport between the site and the town centre.

• A Travel Plan with associated approval fees, monitoring fees and bond. The mitigation sought is deemed to accord with the tests as set out within the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2015, namely that a planning obligation must be (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. In the absence of securing these contributions, the application is refused on the grounds of failing to meet the requirements for affordable housing and offsite infrastructure and is contrary to Policies CN1, CN6 and CN8 of the Local Plan and the Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018). 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 liable for any CIL payments. Noise The application was accompanied by a Noise Report (SMA Ref: 5966/NA) which has been reviewed by the Environmental Health Officer. The main noise source at the proposed development site is from the Basingstoke to Reading railway line located 150m east of the nearest point of the site. The MOD land north of the site is identified as being predominantly used for storage purposes, which does not pose a noise constraint. MOD air activity such as Chinook helicopter flights is sporadic and, due to the irregularity, infrequency and importance of this type of activity, the report asserts that future residents are likely to be tolerant of this noise. In respect of noise in internal/external amenity areas the report contains the following statements:

"7.8 Façades which are predicted to not comply with the internal noise levels with windows open are presented in Table 7.1 below. A receptor location plan is presented in Figure 7.3. The façades are also represented on Figure 7.1 and Figure 7.2 (refer to key / star symbol)." "7.14 With regard to mitigation to noise levels in outside amenity areas, Figure 7.1 demonstrates that proposed gardens within plots will adhere to BS 8233:2014 noise levels for external amenity areas.

7.15 The construction of the proposed buildings, boundary treatments such as brick walls and high density closed board fences will reduce noise levels in these areas. For example, in the shadow zone of a building or brick wall, noise levels could be reduced by up to 10 dB."

In light of the above the Environmental Health Officer considers the proposals to be acceptable subject to conditions controlling the internal noise levels which should be achieved for those dwellings identified in the noise report (see conditions 11-14). With regards to construction noise, the submitted Noise Report indicates that a regular programme of noise and vibration monitoring could be implemented during the construction phase to ensure that noise and vibration levels at neighbouring buildings remain within reasonable limits throughout the works. As such, the Environmental Health officer has raised no objection in this regard subject to appropriately worded condition (see condition 15). A Vibration Assessment was also submitted in support of the proposals and the Environmental Health Officer has noted the low levels of vibration and sufficient damping between the railway line and the proposed development site. As such, the Environmental Health Officer is satisfied that there is no requirement for a vibration mitigation scheme to be implemented. Air Quality An Air Quality Assessment (ref. J3461A/1/F2) was submitted in support of the application and the Environmental Health Officer notes that the effects of local traffic on the air quality for future residents and users of the proposed development have been shown to be acceptable at the worst-case locations assessed, with concentrations being well below the air quality objectives. The Environmental Health Officer states that the overall operational air quality effects of the proposed development, without mitigation, are judged to be 'not significant'. In respect of operational air quality effects, Environmental Health has suggested a conditions requiring a Construction Environmental Management Plan that would ensure that measures to control dust and other air-borne pollutants are implemented (see condition 16). Contaminated Land A Phase 1 Desk Study and Site Reconnaissance Report addressing contamination across the site has been submitted in support of the proposals. Notwithstanding this, and whilst no objections are raised in principle to the development of the site, the Environmental Health Officer considers that due to the agricultural use of the land and the former farm buildings, a condition requiring a full contaminated land survey to be submitted prior to works commencing on site would be required. Bearing in mind the site will be constructed in phases and different parts of the site due to their historic uses, a contaminated land report for each phase of the development is considered reasonable (see condition 17).

The submitted desk study notes the presence of asbestos roofing on some of the agricultural barns. This material will need to be dealt with in accordance with current regulations. As such, the Environmental Health Officer raises no objection subject to a condition to ensure the asbestos is removed correctly in accordance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (see condition 19). Impact on neighbouring amenities As state above the application is in outline with only access for consideration. Issues relating to the impact of the proposed dwellings on the residential amenity of existing properties both in Razors Farm (Vyne Park) and those on Cufaude Lane opposite will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage, when detailed layouts and designs can be considered. As stated previously, the master plan is for illustrative purposes only. Other matters

Water 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. The proposal has not been accompanied by any information demonstrating that such levels of water consumption will be achieved within the development, however this can be assessed at the reserved matter stage. A planning condition is to be imposed to secure compliance with Policy EM9 (see condition 35). Flood Risk and Drainage 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. The applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy in support of the proposals. The report has shown that whilst there is no risk of flooding from fluvial sources, groundwater sources and artificial sources. The site is shown to be at risk of pluvial flooding, however the development of a surface water strategy would manage this, and exceedance flow routes will be provided through the landscape strategy, to route flood flows away from the development parcels. The illustrative master plans shows how the majority of the drainage ditches that run along some of the hedgerow boundaries of the site will be incorporated into the network of SuDS features across the site. These would be formed of a series of planted swales and ditched along the existing boundaries, as well as new naturalistically designed attenuation basins in the north western part of the site. HCC as the Lead Local Flood Authority has confirmed that on this basis the general principles for the surface water drainage proposals are acceptable, subject to further

information on the proposals being submitted as part of a more detailed design phase (the reserved matters applications). This has been secured through condition 5. Thames Water have identified an inability of the existing foul water network infrastructure to accommodate the needs of the development. Whilst unable to agree a position at present with the developer in relation to foul water networks, Thames Water have requested a condition to prevent occupation of any properties constructed until confirmation has been provided that either all wastewater network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows have been completed. Alternatively, a housing and infrastructure plan has been agreed with Thames Water. This requirement is secured under condition 21. Impact on facilities The report has already considered school provision, affordable housing and the provision of a community hall and play provision. In addition to these facilities, concerns have been raised in relation to the impact of the proposed development upon health facilities. A Primary Health Care Needs Assessment has been submitted by the applicant in support of the application to address these concerns. Healthcare is an issue which has also been covered in the supporting Planning Statement, and has also been raised by the local Ward Councillor (for Chineham). Chineham Medical Practice also commented on the SPD as part of the public consultation, raising concerns about the impact the proposed housing is likely to have on the service they provide. The LPA is aware of the constraints associated with the existing medical practice in Chineham in terms of the capacity of their premises, and has been working proactively with the Clinical Commissioning Group in order to find ways to facilitate improved accommodation for the practice. This dialogue is on-going. It should be noted that the adopted Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD does not require the provision of a new medical centre. The increase in population as a result of this proposed development could not justify it. The Primary Care Needs Assessment states that the development would generate the need for 0.7GPs. The BDBC Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP 2017) acknowledges that there is a need to improve and expand existing GPs to service the proposed allocations in the local plan, with only one site including the provision of a new surgery (Manydown). The IDP states that expansion of existing GPs can be funded only by the NHS and CCG. It should be noted that CIL receipts can be spent on supporting healthcare infrastructure provision, as per the 123 list. Furthermore, while the IDP states that funding will be via the NHS/CCG, this does not preclude CIL money also being used for that purpose. However, no guarantee can be provided that CIL receipts will definitely be spent on healthcare infrastructure, as it is not possible to guarantee

what any CIL money collected will be spent on (i.e. the money collected in respect of this site would not be ‘ring-fenced’ for spending on healthcare provision). Conclusion 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 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 provide 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. There is a clear presumption in favour of sustainable development set out within the NPPF. Taking account of the detailed assessment set out above when considered against the social, environmental and economic dimensions of sustainability, the proposal is considered to be a sustainable form of development. The development would deliver housing in the short term and therefore would contribute towards the 5 year land supply position, which is a clear benefit of the scheme. The site is identified within the local plan greenfield site allocation (Policy SS3) as coming forward for development in 2020/21 – 2025/26. Whilst it is acknowledged that there will be impacts of permitting this development, this report has identified that these impacts are not so significant so as to outweigh the benefits, and therefore, on balance, it would be appropriate to support the principle of permitting development on this site in accordance with the NPPF. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans: Location Plan - PRB/UCF/PA1B Illustrative Layout Plan - PRB/UCF/PA6J Open Space Plan - PRB/UCF/PA8F Land Use Plan - PRB/UCF/PA11D Character Areas Plan - PRB/UCF/PA4H Access and Movement Plan - PRB/UCF/PA9E Design and Access Statement (as amended)

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

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration

of 3 years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of 2 years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is later.

REASON: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004) and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local

Planning Authority before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

4 Prior to the commencement of development of each phase of the

development, as agreed under condition 5 of this permission, approval of the details of the layout, scale, appearance of the proposed building(s), and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing. REASON: In order to secure a satisfactory development and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5 No development shall take place until a Phasing Scheme has been submitted

to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Phasing Scheme shall detail the timetable for the overall development, including implementation and completion of the means of access and the offsite highway works. Development shall proceed in accordance with the approved Phasing Scheme. REASON: In the interests of the proper planning of the development and to ensure the monitoring of the timing and implementation of the permission in the interests of Housing Land Supply in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

6 Applications for the approval of reserved matters shall be in accordance with

the principles and parameters described and illustrated in the Design and Access Statement (dated November 2018 ref. PRB/UCF/PA20B and as amended in April 2019) and the Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD March 2019. For the avoidance of doubt all reference to indicative masterplan shall be drawing no. PRB/UCF/PA6J and any conditions on this approval will supersede any reference made in this document where relevant. REASON: To ensure an appropriate co-ordinated high quality form of development and to accord with the Planning Practice Guidance.

7 Applications for the approval of reserved matters shall be in accordance with

Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policy H2 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan, the Housing SPD and the Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD with particular regard to the provision of an appropriate housing mix and implementation of 15% of market dwellings being built to lifetime mobility standards. REASON: To ensure an appropriate co-ordinated high quality form of development and to accord with Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane

Local Plan 2011-2029, Policy H2 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan and the Housing SPD.

8 Prior to the commencement of development of each phase of development as

agreed under condition 5 of this permission, no development shall commence (in relation to that specific phase being pursued) until a materials schedule detailing the types and colours of external materials to be used, including colour of mortar and windows, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that phase. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: 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 and Policy D2 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan.

9 Prior to the commencement of development of each phase of development as

agreed under condition 5 of this permission, no development shall take place (in relation to that specific phase being pursued) until full details of both hard and soft landscape proposals have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that phase. These details shall include, as appropriate, proposed finished levels or contours, means of enclosure, car parking layouts, other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas, location and design of play areas, hard surfacing materials and minor artefacts and structures (eg furniture, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting, external services, etc). Soft landscape details shall include planting plan, specification (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedules of plants, (including replacement trees where appropriate), noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate, as well as any works to enhance wildlife habitats where appropriate. In addition, an implementation timetable for each phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences within that Phase. If applicable, these details will also extend to cover areas of open space to be adopted by the Council, such areas shall be agreed in writing prior to development commencing. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details in accordance with the timetable agreed with the Local Planning Authority. 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, to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs and in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Policies D2 and RE3 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan.

10 Prior to the commencement of each phase of development as agreed under

condition 5 of this permission, no works shall take place until a measured survey of that phase 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 adjoining properties in accordance Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 nd Policy D2 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan.

11 Dwellings highlighted in figure 7.3 of Noise Report SMA Ref: 5966/NA Issue 2

shall be fitted with an alternative method of mechanical ventilation in order to supply outside air to habitable rooms with windows closed, in order to relieve the need to open windows. Methods shall include either a system 4 MVHR system with cool air by-pass, or standalone mechanical units supplying outside air to each affected habitable room. Background and passive ventilators, and system 3 extraction systems are not adequate for this purpose. REASON: In the interests of residential amenity, and to ensure acceptable noise levels are not exceeded within the dwellings and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

12 The internal noise levels associated with any mechanical units and associated

ductwork shall not exceed NR25. The ventilation system shall be designed to ensure that noise from external sources is not conducted into any habitable room. REASON: In the interests of residential amenity, and to ensure acceptable noise levels are not exceeded within the dwellings and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

13 No dwelling shall be occupied (in relation to the relevant phase as agreed

under condition 5) until all the works which form part of the scheme for protecting the proposed dwellings from rail traffic noise as approved by the Local Planning Authority under condition 11 above have been completed. All works which form part of the approved scheme shall be completed prior to first occupation in relation to the relevant phase as approved under condition 5. The approved scheme shall be thereafter maintained, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that acceptable noise levels within the dwellings and the curtilages of the dwellings are not exceeded in the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

14 No dwelling shall be occupied (in relation to the relevant phase as agreed

under condition 5) until a post completion noise survey has been undertaken by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant, and a report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The post completion testing shall assess performance of the noise mitigation measures against the

following noise levels with mitigation in place (and, where installed, mechanical ventilation in operation):

a) Internal day time (0700 - 2300) noise levels shall not exceed 35dB LAeq, 16hr for habitable rooms (bedrooms and living rooms with windows open*) b) Internal night time (2300 - 0700) noise levels shall not exceed 30dB LAeq with individual noise events not exceeding 45dB LAfMax (windows open*). c) Garden areas shall not exceed 55 dB LAeq, 16hr,

A method statement should be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the survey being undertaken, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. If these noise levels are exceeded, additional noise mitigation measures, (where necessary to ensure the appropriate noise levels can be met), shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Authority and implemented in full prior to the first occupation of the relevant phase. REASON: In the interests of residential amenity, and to ensure acceptable noise levels are not exceeded within the dwellings and in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

15 The commencement of the development on each phase (as approved under

condition 5) shall not take place until a programme for the monitoring of noise and vibration during the construction of that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The programme shall specify the method of noise and vibration measurement and make provision for noise and vibration measurements to be taken at a time to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The results of all noise and vibration measurements shall be given to the Local Planning Authority as soon as they are available. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 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.

16 No development shall take place (in relation to the relevant phase as agreed

under condition 5) until a site specific Construction Environmental Management Plan has been submitted to and been approved in writing by the LPA. The plan must demonstrate the adoption and use of the best practicable means to reduce the effects of noise, vibration, dust and site lighting. The plan should include, but not be limited to:

Procedures for maintaining good public relations including complaint management, public consultation and liaison; Arrangements for liaison with the Council's Environmental Protection Team; All works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary, or at such other place as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be carried out only between the following hours: 0730 Hours and 18 00 Hours on Mondays to Fridays and 08 00 and 13 00 Hours on Saturdays and; at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays;

Deliveries to and removal of plant, equipment, machinery and waste from the site must only take place within the permitted hours detailed above. Mitigation measures as defined in BS 5528: Parts 1 and 2: 2009 Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites shall be used to minimise noise disturbance from construction works. Procedures for emergency deviation of the agreed working hours; BDBC encourages all contractors to be 'Considerate Contractors' when working in the Borough by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment; Control measures for dust and other air-borne pollutants; Measures for controlling the use of site lighting whether required for safe working or for security purposes; 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.

17 With the exception of the demolition of existing buildings and removal of

existing hardstanding and any underground infrastructure no works (in relation to the relevant phase as agreed under condition 5) pursuant to this permission shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:-

(a) 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 written by Leap Environmental Ltd dated 21/11/17 in accordance with BS10175:2011- Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice;

(b) 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. If during any works (in relation to the relevant phase as agreed under condition 5) 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 Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11'.

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 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use (in

relation to the relevant phase as agreed under condition 5) until there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of condition 17(b) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 17(b) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation), such verification shall comprise;

as built drawings of the implemented scheme; photographs of the remediation works in progress; 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 17(b). 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

19 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use (in

relation to the relevant phase as agreed under condition 5) until there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification that any identified asbestos has been removed from the application site and disposed of by a licensed asbestos contractor in accordance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. REASON: To ensure that all asbestos on the site is removed to protect any future occupants of the site and current occupants of adjacent land in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

20 No development in relation to each phase of the development as approved

under condition 5, shall take place until a detailed surface water drainage strategy has been provided to the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the Lead Local Flood Authority, containing the following elements:

A detailed set of surface water drainage drawings showing the surface water drainage network including any SuDs features and flow control measures. The drawings will need to confirm the point of outfall into the existing watercourse and indicate any works that are required to the watercourse downstream of the connection point.

Micro drainage calculation to confirm the network has been modelled hydraulically and that enough storage has been allowed for a 1 in a 100 year

event plus climate change. Calculations must also include for an allowance of 10% urban creep.

Where infiltration is used for drainage, evidence that a suitable number of infiltration tests have been completed. These need to be across the whole site and completed according to the BRE 365 method or another recognised method including British Standard BS 5930:2015.

Provide Maintenance regimes of the entire surface water drainage system including individual SuDS features, including a plan illustrating the organisation responsible for each element. Evidence that those responsible/adopting bodies are in discussion with the developer. For larger/phased sites, details to be submitted as evidence of measures to be taken to protect and ensure continued operation of drainage features during construction.

REASON: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, both on and off site in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

21 No properties shall be occupied (in relation to the relevant phase as agreed

under condition 5) until confirmation has been provided that either:- all wastewater network upgrades required to accommodate the additional flows from the development have been completed; or- a housing and infrastructure phasing plan has been agreed with Thames Water to allow additional properties to be occupied. Where a housing and infrastructure phasing plan is agreed no occupation shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed housing and infrastructure phasing plan. REASON: The development may lead to sewage flooding and network reinforcement works are anticipated to be necessary to ensure that sufficient capacity is made available to accommodate additional flows anticipated from the new development. Any necessary reinforcement works will be necessary in order to avoid sewer flooding and/or potential pollution incidents." The developer can request information to support the discharge of this condition by visiting the Thames Water website at thameswater.co.uk/preplanning.

22 No development shall commence in relation to each phase of development as

approved under condition 5, including any work of demolition, until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period in relation to the relevant phase. The Statement shall provide for: i) the parking and turning of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; ii) loading and unloading of plant and materials; iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; iv) wheel washing facilities or an explanation why they are not necessary; v) the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities of public viewing, where appropriate; vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;

vii) a scheme for recycling and disposing of waster resulting from construction work; viii) size and routing of construction vehicles and holding areas for these on/off site; and ix) the disposing of waste resulting from construction activities so as to avoid undue interference with the operation of the public highway during the Monday and Friday AM peak (0800 to 0900) and PM peak (1630 to 1800) periods.

REASON: In the interest of highway safety and to reduce the traffic impact of the development in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

23 No development in relation to each phase as agreed under condition 5, shall

commence until a scheme for the provision of Electric Vehicle Charging points for both unallocated and allocated parking spaces has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of that phase shall then proceed in full accordance with the approved scheme. 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, paragraph 110(e) of the NPPF and the Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief SPD.


condition 5, an archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation for the archaeological evaluation of the site shall be submitted to and approved by in writing the Local Planning Authority. The archaeological evaluation shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To allow for the recording of items of archaeological interest in accordance with the advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.


condition 5, an archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation shall be submitted to and approved by in writing the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and mitigation works shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To allow for the recording of items of archaeological interest in accordance with the advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

26 In relation to the route of the Roman road, details of the interpretation boards

(including their location and a timetable for their provision) shall be submitted to and approved in writing as part of the associated relevant reserved matters application. The boards shall be erected in accordance with the agreed timetable.

REASON: To ensure the historic importance of the Roman road makes a positive contribution to the surrounding development in accordance with the advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

27 Applications for the approval of reserved matters shall be accompanied by a

waste collection strategy in relation to the relevant phase. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory form of development in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

28 Prior to commencement of development of each phase as agreed under

condition 5 of this permission, a strategy for external lighting and street lighting within that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. External lighting and street lighting shall be provided on each phase in accordance with the approved details. The strategy shall: a) identify those areas/features on site that are particularly sensitive for dormice, bats or badgers and that are likely to cause disturbance in or around their breeding sites and resting places or along important routes used to access key areas of their territory, for example, for foraging; and b) show how and where external lighting will be installed (through the provision of appropriate lighting contour plans and technical specifications) so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent the above species using their territory or having access to their breeding sites and resting places, in particular along key connectivity routes and habitats closest to development.

All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations set out in the strategy, and these shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the strategy. Under no circumstances should any other external lighting be installed without prior consent from the local planning authority

REASON: Artificial light can harm the ecology of an area through disruption of the natural diurnal rhythms of wildlife. The imposition of this condition will ensure that reasonable measures are taken to protect wildlife, in accordance with the Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

29 Details of the means of access, including the layout, construction and sight lines, as shown in principle on drawings J323512-PS-011; 012; 013; 014, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before development commences. The agreed details shall be fully implemented in accordance with a timetable to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Highway Authority.

REASON: To ensure a satisfactory means of access to the highway in accordance with Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

30 Prior to the commencement of development of each phase as agreed under

condition 5 of this permission, an Aboricultural Impact Assessment and Aboricultural Method Statement (drawn up to reflect the current British Standard BS5837) in relation to any retained trees contained within the land subject to that phase, shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that full consideration is given to all tree issues as an integral part of the planning application for the benefit of the local amenities and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD.

31 The reserved matters for each phase of development shall achieve at least

the minimum buffer distances in relation to tree belts, woodlands, trees and hedgerows as outlined in the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD. REASON: To ensure that full consideration is given to all tree issues as an integral part of the planning application for the benefit of the local amenities and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD.

32 The reserved matters for any phase of development adjoining the SINC

woodland to the south of the site shall make provision for the extension of the woodland by providing additional planting, as outlined in the Upper Cufaude Farm Development Brief. REASON: To ensure that full consideration is given to all tree and biodiversity issues as an integral part of the planning application for the benefit of the local amenities and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD.

33 Prior to the commencement of any works in relation to the two vehicular access into the site on the southern boundary, detailed mitigation works in relation to the dormouse bridge provision and additional planting along the southern boundary in association with the dormouse mitigation (as outlined in the Technical Briefing Note dated 17/07/2019) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved works shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To minimise the impact of the development upon the identified dormouse population and enhance habitat connectivity to surrounding woodland in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

34 Prior to commencement of any works in relation to the phase of development agreed under condition 5 associated with the northern portion of the central hedgerow, details of the dormouse ‘hop-over’ and associated highway engineering works and planting (as outlined in the Technical Briefing Note dated 17/07/2019) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved works shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To minimise the impact of the development upon the identified dormouse population and to maintain habitat connectivity to surrounding woodland in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.


condition 5, including any demolition works, soil moving, temporary access construction/widening, or storage of materials, a Biodiversity Mitigation Strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include details of the following:

(a) All buffers to woodland, both designated and non-designated, to be at

least 20 metres wide as measured from the point at which any reasonable woodland habitat stops or the edge of the canopy (whichever is greater).

(b) Important habitats and their associated buffers are not to be used as allocation for formally managed green-space provision or any other inappropriate uses listed in the council’s Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD.

(c) Details of the timing/ecological watching brief procedures required to address the protection of breeding birds, bats, dormice, badgers, reptiles and amphibians before and during any development works.

(d) Details of mitigation proposals for mitigating any potential adverse effects on bats, amphibians, dormice, reptiles, badgers or birds and any features that they are dependent on. This is to include details of measures that will be taken to maintain dark corridors for nocturnal wildlife, namely foraging bats, dormice and badgers , and specific measures that will be taken to minimise domestic animal predation on native fauna.

(e) Details of how mature trees, woodland and hedgerow habitats adjacent to the area of the proposed development will be protected during the construction works.

(f) Provisions for the supervision and monitoring of the plan, including briefing construction personnel, and the name and contact details of the person responsible for this;

No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved Biodiversity Mitigation Strategy. No habitat or other landscape features that are to be retained as part of the approved Biodiversity Mitigation Strategy shall be damaged or destroyed, or

removed without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority, before practical completion of the development.

If a habitat or other landscape feature is removed or damaged in contravention of this agreement, a scheme of remedial action, with a timetable for implementation, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 28 days of the incident. The scheme of remedial action must be approved by the Local Planning Authority before practical completion of the development and implemented in accordance with the approved timetable.

REASON: to minimise the impact on the existing biodiversity of the site and its surroundings, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

36 Prior to the commencement of development of each phase as agreed under

condition 5 of this permission, full details of a habitat enhancement and management scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in relation to each phase of development. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details.

The details shall include:

a) Description and evaluation of features to be created, enhanced and managed

b) Ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence management

c) Aims and objectives of management with precise habitat descriptions on which the plan may be monitored and enforced

d) Appropriate management options for achieving aims and objectives e) Prescriptions for achievable management actions f) Preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable

of being rolled forward over a five-year period) g) Details of the body or organisation responsible for implementation of

the plan h) Ongoing monitoring and remedial measures

REASON: To help compensate for habitat loss resulting from the development and help to maintain the biodiversity of the area in the long term, in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

37 Prior to commencement of any works in relation to the phase of development

agreed under condition 5 associated with the demolition of the existing farm buildings on site a Bat survey of the buildings to be demolished will be carried out to establish whether bats are roosting within the buildings to be removed (or whether they are probably absent). If bats are found to be present, further survey work will be necessary to provide an assessment of the population size class and type of roost present.

• If the survey determines that Bats are present, a wildlife protection and

mitigation plan must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan must identify how any potential adverse effects on bats and any features that they are dependent will be mitigated.

• If a wildlife protection and mitigation plan needs to be submitted, no

landscaping works or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: Bats are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and European law. If they are present on site they are a material consideration under Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. All of the above practicable measures are required to ensure the species is safeguarded.

38 No development, including demolition works, soil moving, temporary access

construction/widening, or storage of materials, shall commence until an updated Badger survey of the site has been carried out to establish badger activity on site. If badger setts or signs of badger activity are found to be present, a wildlife protection and mitigation plan must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan must identify how any potential adverse effects on badgers and any features that they are dependent will be mitigated.

If a wildlife protection and mitigation plan needs to be submitted, no landscaping works or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved plan.

REASON: Badgers are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. If they are present on site they are a material consideration under Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. All of the above practicable measures are required to ensure the species is safeguarded.

39 No development shall take place in relation to each phase of development as

agreed under condition 5 (including demolition, ground works, vegetation clearance), until a construction environmental management plan (CEMP: Biodiversity) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEMP (Biodiversity) shall include the following: a) Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities. b) Identification of ‘biodiversity protection zones’ c) Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working

practices) to avoid or reduced impacts during construction (may be provided as a set of method statements).

d) The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity features, such as the SINCs, protected species etc.

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

f) Responsible persons and lines of communication. g) The role and responsibilities on site of an ecological clerk of works

(ECoW). h) Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs. The approved CEMP shall be adhered to and implemented throughout the construction period strictly in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To minimise the impact on the existing biodiversity of the site and its surroundings, in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

40 No development shall take place in relation to each phase of development as

agreed under condition 5, including demolition, ground works and vegetation clearance, until a biodiversity monitoring strategy has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The purpose of the strategy shall be to establish the effectiveness of measures to provide suitable conditions to retain the populations of species identified as ecological features present within the proposed development site on site post-development and measures to create new areas of suitable habitat conditions for such species/habitats by recording their distribution and abundance. It should also include information on the use of the toad tunnels by toads. The content of the Strategy shall include the following:

a) Aims and objectives of monitoring to match the stated purpose. b) Identification of adequate baseline conditions prior to the start of

development c) Appropriate success criteria, thresholds, triggers and targets against

which the effectiveness of the various conservation measures being monitored can be judged.

d) Methods for data gathering and analysis e) Location of monitoring f) Timing and duration of monitoring g) Responsible persons and lines of communication h) Review, and where appropriate, publication of results and outcomes. A report describing the results of monitoring shall be submitted to the local planning authority at intervals identified in the strategy. The report shall also set out (where the results from monitoring show that conservation aims and objectives are not being met) how contingencies and/or remedial action will be identified, agreed with the local planning authority, and then implemented so that the development still delivers the fully functioning biodiversity objectives of the originally approved scheme. The monitoring strategy will be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: A number of important species are found on site or in the surrounding area and are material planning considerations under Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. These measures are required to minimise indirect impacts on the existing population of these

species and habitats and help to promote their expansion within the areas to be retained.

41 No development in relation to each phase as agreed under condition 5, shall

commence until a scheme 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, unless otherwise agreed in writing with 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: 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.

42 Prior to the submission of the reserved matters applications, a detailed habitat

enhancement and management strategy for the whole site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All subsequent reserved matters applications shall be accompanied by a habitat enhancement and management scheme which follows the wider approved strategy. The development in relation to each reserved matters application shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. The details for each reserved matters submission shall include:

a) Description and evaluation of features to be created, enhanced and

managed b) Ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence

management c) Aims and objectives of management with precise habitat descriptions on

which the plans may be monitored and enforced d) Appropriate management options for achieving aims and objectives e) Prescriptions of achievable management actions f) Preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable of

being rolled forward over a 5 year period) g) Details of the body or organisation responsible for implementation of the

plan h) Ongoing monitoring and remedial measures

REASON: To help compensate for habitat loss resulting from the development and help to maintain the biodiversity of the area in the long term, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD (December 2018).

Informatives 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.



- 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 54-57).

In this instance:

- the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit; - was provided with pre-application advice;


3. Whilst the principle of the provision of community facilities in the northern part of

the site is acceptable, the details shown on the illustrative layout are not

acceptable and the applicant is advised that as part of a future reserved matters application for this area, the layout will need to be redesigned to address consultee comments in relation to security, access to open space and the proximity of the facilities to future properties.

4. In relation to condition 31, the applicant is advised that the indicative location of

the road in Housing Area A is too close to the SINC to the south and encroaches into the 20m buffer zone and as such any subsequent reserved matter application will need to address this. In relation to condition 32, the applicant is advised that the provision of additional planting in proximity to the Roman Road SINC to the south of the site will need to be enhanced under any future reserved matters applications.

5. In relation to conditions 35 and 36, the Biodiversity Mitigation Strategy and the

Habitat Enhancement/Management Scheme should include all the wildlife protection, mitigation and enhancement measures given in the Technical Briefing Note dated 17th July and the reports referenced within that document. The Habitat Enhancement/Management Scheme should also clearly state the measures that will be undertaken to compensate the loss of skylark territories on site.

App No.: 19/00018/OUT

Location plan

App No.: 19/00018/OUT

Access Plans

App No.: 19/00018/OUT

Illustrative Layout Plan


Item No. 3

Application no: 19/00579/FUL


Site Address Land At Boundary Hall Aldermaston Road Tadley Hampshire

Proposal Erection of 17 no. apartments (2 no. 1 bed and 15 no. 2 bed) with parking, landscaping and associated works

Registered: 11 March 2019 Expiry Date: 15 July 2019


Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Katherine Fitzherbert-Green 01256 845716

Applicant: BradPlan LLP Agent: Mr Charles McClea

Ward: Baughurst And Tadley North

Ward Member(s): Cllr Michael Bound Cllr Warwick Lovegrove

Parish: TADLEY CP OS Grid Reference: 459581 162478

Recommendation: Subject to no objection being received from West Berkshire/ Hampshire County Council/ONR Emergency Planners, the applicant be invited to enter into a legal agreement (in accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 and Policies SS7, CN1, CN6, CN8 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029) between the applicant and the Borough Council to secure:

An Emergency Management Plan together with securing the implementation, management, monitoring and review of the Emergency Management Plan

Five units of affordable housing

Financial contributions towards off site public open space

Should the requirements set out above not be satisfactorily secured, then the Planning and Development Manager be delegated to REFUSE permission for appropriate reasons. On completion of the legal agreement the Planning and Development Manager be delegated to grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.


Reasons for Approval

1. The proposed development would deliver housing development on land within the Settlement Policy Boundary of Tadley and upon land which has been demonstrated to not likely be brought forward for an employment generating use. The proposal would be in accordance with in accordance with the Borough's Land Supply requirements. The proposal therefore accords with Policies SD1, SS1 and EP2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

2. The proposed development would provide affordable housing to meet an identified need. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019); Policy CN1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the Council's Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document 2018.

3. The development would provide a safe and suitable access and would not

cause an adverse impact on highway safety and adequate parking would be secured to serve the proposed development and as such the proposal would comply with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 and the Council’s Parking Supplementary Planning Document 2018.

4. The proposal would conserve the biodiversity value and nature conservation

interests of the site and as such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5. The proposed development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or

cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, or overbearing impacts to existing neighbouring properties, and as such would comply with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6. The proposed housing development is development that is sensitive to pollution

including noise and odour. There would be no significant detrimental impact to future residents beyond that which may be reasonably expected, as a result of existing, historic, or nearby land uses and activity; and as such the proposal accords with policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 - 2029.

7. Adequate drainage (foul and surface water) can be provided for the

development and can be adequately controlled through other legislation, and through planning conditions, so as to ensure that there would be no risk to property or the environment. The proposal accords with Policy CN6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 in this respect.

8. The development would not result in an adverse increase risk of flooding and

as such the proposal would comply with National Planning Policy Framework and Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9. The site is located within proximity to the Atomic Weapons Establishment of Aldermaston and Burghclere. The proposed development can provide a means to ensure that the needs of the inhabitant of the development can be accommodated in the event of an emergency and as such the development would accord with Policy SS7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029.

10. The provision of a Section 106 agreement would ensure that the development provides adequate framework for meeting emergency planning needs as well as infrastructure to mitigate the impact of the development in relation affordable housing and off site public open space. The development therefore complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019); Policies SS7, CN1, CN6 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029; the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended); the Council's Housing Supplementary Planning Document (2018), the Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (2018) and the Green Infrastructure Strategy (2018).

General comments This application is brought to the Development Control Committee in line with the scheme of delegation due to the number of objections and the Officer’s recommendation for approval. 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 application site within the Settlement Policy Boundary for Tadley. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (February 2019) 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) National Planning Practice Guidance

Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 The Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 sets the Council’s vision and strategy for the area and will provide the basis for decisions on planning applications. The main policies of the Local Plan relevant to this proposed development comprise: Policy SD1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) Policy SS2 (Regeneration) Policy SS7 (Nuclear Installations – Aldermaston and Burghfield) Policy CN1 (Affordable Housing) Policy CN3 (Housing Mix for Market Housing) Policy CN6 (Infrastructure) Policy CN7 (Essential Facilities and Services) Policy CN8 (Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities) Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM4 (Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation) Policy EM5 (Green Infrastructure) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development). Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability SPD (2018) Parking Standards (2018) Housing SPD (2018) Landscape and Biodiversity SPD Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018) Tadley Design Statement (2004) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (Revised 2015) The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 Green Infrastructure Strategy (2018) Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2015) Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 Description of Site The application site comprises a broadly rectangular area of land extending across approximately 0.10ha located to the west of Aldermaston Road. The site forms part of the wider Boundary Hall development for the erection of 115 dwellings and a commercial property initially granted planning permission under BDB/67609 in 2011. The land to which this application relates was secured for the commercial property which has not yet been implemented, although by virtue of the implementation of residential development, this permission remains extant.

The land is broadly level and currently contains unkempt scrub grassland enclosed with metal herras fencing. It has a frontage to Aldermaston Road separated by a row of mature English Oak trees (which are understood to be managed Hampshire County Council) and the public footway. To the north of the site sit two storey dwelling houses which are orientated to face northwest with rear gardens extending to abut the site. The dwellings comprise semi-detached pairs to the north of a public footway which provides access through to an area of public open space with a terrace of three units to the south. To the south west of the site sits hardstanding with parking which was laid out to serve the commercial property and to the south is a three storey block of flats. Access to the Boundary Hall site extends from Aldermaston Road to the south east boundary of the application site which serves the residential units and is also used in relation to a bank which abuts the access to the south. To the south and beyond the site is the Tadley District Centre. Proposal Planning permission was first granted under reference BDB/67609 for the redevelopment of Boundary Hall to provide a predominately residential development in conjunction with the erection of a single building containing 945m2 of commercial space (Class B1). This permission was granted by the Secretary of State through a ‘called-in’ appeal in 2011. The development has been implemented with the exception of the commercial building whereby instead it is proposed to erect a three storey building containing 15 two bedroom flats and 2 one bedroom flats. The proposed building would be orientated to face north east and towards Aldermaston Road and have a footprint of 37m by 16.50m and rise to 10.50m. The accommodation is to be arranged over all three floors with space at the ground floor to also provide for refuse/recycling and cycle storage together with parking. The primary access to the building is to be taken from the south west elevation within Boundary Place. This has direct access to the rear courtyard which will provide access for parking provided in an undercroft area to the north of the site as well as reusing the parking previously allocated and laid out to serve the commercial building. A further two spaces are provided adjacent to the south east elevation. The reallocation of the existing parking would require the removal of a 1.5m high brick wall which encloses the parking area. Access to the development would utilise the existing access into Boundary Place from Aldermaston Road (A340). Amendments Additional information has been received during the course of the application on the 21st May and the 28th June seeking to address concerns raised with regard to the impact of the residential development upon the AWE Emergency Plan. Such information comprises:

Legal Opinions

Technical Notes on Site Emergency Plan

Suggested clauses for a S106 agreement on resettlement

Boundary Place Emergency Plan

Case Study notes from Barrow in Furness

Applicant’s response to Emergency Planners consultation responses.

The application is a resubmission of an identically designed scheme to that previously considered under reference 18/01089/FUL refused permission in February 2019. The reason for refusal concerned only the impact of the development upon the Off Site Nuclear Emergency Plan. This application seeks to overcome this previous reason for refusal. Consultations Councillor Bound and Councillor Lovegrove (Upon consultation following the departure of Councillor Tate): “We have decided that we will not call this decision to go to DC and are happy therefore to go along with the Officer recommendation”. Councillor Tate: “Not sure if this is still possible but if this application were to be minded for refusal on grounds from ONR then I would ask again that this is called in for Committee determination as the previous application for this site. This is an application that is of great benefit locally and needs proper debate if minded for officer refusal.” Tadley Town Council: “Object. Parking spaces 13 and 14 are in an extremely dangerous position, Boundary Place is a very busy road not just with residents but with visitors to Barclays Bank who park directly opposite these proposed parking spaces. Residents who have purchased properties on the site have been misled by the original plans which stated this area was to be for commercial property. Overdevelopment of the site. The height of the building is not appropriate for a building fronting onto Aldermaston Road and is out of keeping with adjacent properties. It will also overshadow adjoining properties. Believe this application is not in the spirit of what was originally intended for the site, i.e. ‘a gateway to Tadley’. Would like to have seen more serious effort in securing a commercial buyer for the site. Concerned about the loss of existing parking spaces for Royal Gardens and the effect this will have on the management of parking on the site. Unhappy to see there are no changes to the plans previously submitted.” Planning Policy: No objection. Urban Design: No objection. Trees: Objection on the following grounds (in summary):

Concern over the proximity of the proposed north east elevation to the existing trees.

Previous office block was set further back, had a smaller footprint and larger windows in order to be more forgiving in terms of internal daylight.

Subsequent to the approved application, the Landscape, Trees and Biodiversity SPD has been adopted requiring adequate separation from trees which is not achieved to the roadside oak trees.

Note the internal daylight assessment however uncertain as to how conclusions that there will be sufficient daylight have been achieved.

Parks and Open Spaces: No objection subject to a financial contribution towards off site public open space.

Environmental Health: No objection subject to conditions. Landscape: No objection subject to conditions. Environment Agency: No objection. Biodiversity: No objection subject to conditions. Housing: No objection. HCC Archaeology: No objection. HCC Highways: No objection subject to conditions. HCC Lead Local Flood Authority: No objection subject to conditions. West Berkshire Emergency Planning: Initial comments – Advise against the development. Interim comments – Insufficient response. Applicant needs to provide a detailed plan such that the development and recovery process would not have an impact on the responders for the lifetime of the site. Recommend refusal. Final comments – Awaited at the time of reporting. Verbal discussion has indicated that the latest approach to managing long term resettlement would be acceptable. HCC Emergency Planning: Initial comments – Advise against the development. Interim comments – Advise against the development. Final comments – Awaited at time of reporting. Office for Nuclear Regulation: Initial comments - Advise against the development unless the emergency planners at West Berkshire Council provide confirmation that, in their opinion, that the development can be accommodated within their existing off-site emergency planning arrangements. Interim comments – Advise against the development. Final Comments – Awaited at time of reporting. Thames Water: No objection subject to informatives. Joint Waste Client Team: Objection on grounds of insufficient information. Southern Gas Networks – Plan provided of pipes in vicinity of site. Public Observations Ten representations expressing objection on the following grounds: Principle of development

No changes have been made since the previous application.

Existing affordable housing is provided at ground floor of existing blocks. Object to the proposal for 40% affordable housing in a quiet place to live.

Existing area is overdeveloped.

Advised when purchasing a dwelling that the site would be used only for commercial uses which would have a better outlook for current residents.

Design

Object to the large building extending up to the site boundaries which is too large in relation to its surroundings.

Whole area is overdeveloped.

A development of this size is unacceptable.

Overcrowding on this stretch of road with the construction also of Lidl.

Amenity

Loss of privacy to properties on Boundary Place from new overlooking into rooms such as lounges and master bedrooms.

Loss of light to front windows of Boundary Place which face the A340 which receive little natural light after midday.

Existing properties will look onto the apartment block.

Noise and disruption created by the development upon existing privately owned dwellings.

Highways

Existing Boundary Place is difficult to access due to heavy traffic. An increase in traffic will increase the risk of accidents.

Visitors to Barclays Bank often park and turn on the road/driveway leading to existing apartments. Increasing the number of residents will increase congestion.

Parking is difficult with the existing amount of development

The addition of further flats will make existing parking problems worse.

This application and the application for a new Lidl Store opposite will create chaos entering and leaving the estate onto the main A340 with an unacceptable volume of traffic.

Parking bays shown for the proposed development are fully utilised by visitors and families with two cars mainly during evenings and weekends. Allocating spaces to the proposed build will leave no allocated visitor parking.

The site already has more cars than parking spaces.

Only parking spaces 1 – 12 will be in the footprint of the property with spaces 15-25 using existing undesignated spaces which would reduce the free-for-all parking which is essentially theft. It is unacceptable to designated use these spaces to the development.

Property was purchased on the basis of being provided with one car parking space, with space for visitors and available undesignated spaces (numbered 15-25).

Access is difficult for large vehicles or emergency services. Non-bay parking essentially causes a risk to vehicles being damaged or access being hampered.

Spaces to be used for the development are already used by existing flat residents together with kerbside parking.

Existing parking spaces are too narrow and the proposed courtyard is too tight, difficult to manoeuvre and is dangerous with the high wall.

Visibility is hampered on site by cars parking on the kerbs with a new block

making this harder.

Parking requirements are not met on site.

Originally the area had been designed with the intention of the commercial office block having use of parking during the day and the current apartments having use during evenings/weekends.

Natural Environment

Consideration should be given to the inclusion of internal nest sites for Swifts with a minimum of 17 swift bricks installed in the development in addition to bird nesting boxes.

Tadley has no green area for people to walk through and sit and have lunch. The site is an ideal spot to have lunch, for instance for AWE staff.

Tadley needs a nice park between Sainsbury’s and AWE.

Impact upon air quality from local congestion. Other matters

No further development should occur in Tadley until there is an improvement in local infrastructure such as dentists and doctors together with a greater variety of shops.

Potential for friction amongst the new property and surrounding property occupants.

Site is within the Detailed Emergency Planning Zone (DEPZ) and the proposal with the increase in population in the second most densely populated sector would have a detrimental impact on the Aldermaston off-site emergency planning arrangements and contrary to Policy SS7 of the Local Plan and the NPPF.

Absence of a legal agreement to secure affordable housing and contribute towards local community infrastructure.

Developer assured occupiers that any development in this location would have no significant impact on the existing builds and infrastructure.

Relevant Planning History 18/01089/FUL Erection of 17 apartments (2no 1 bedroom

and 15 no 2 bedroom), parking, landscape and associated works.

Refused 07.02.2019

Appeal pending - hearing scheduled for 24.09.19

BDB/75320 Variation of Condition 1 of BDB/67609 to allow substitution of plan numbers for various minor amendments including changes to house types.

Approved 09.09.2013

BDB/67609 Redevelopment of the land to include the

erection of a new building to provide 945sqm of B1 use commercial floor space and erection of 115 no dwellings, new public open space, car parking, new footpaths, landscaping and 2no new access roads off Almswood Road and

Appeal allowed 16/06/2011

improvement to existing access point off Aldermaston Road following the demolition of existing hall and relocation of existing substation.

The application site has been subject to a number of planning applications prior to its redevelopment which were withdrawn, including proposals for residential development and a food store. The details of these applications have not been included given that these are not relevant to the current proposal. Assessment The main planning considerations arising from this proposal comprise the principle of providing residential development as opposed to delivering additional commercial space having regard to the national and local planning policy context. The provision of housing also needs to be balanced against the impact upon emergency planning, the impact upon the character and appearance of the area, residential amenity, traffic generation and highway impacts, and the natural environment. Background This application is a revised submission to that previously considered under reference 18/01089/FUL, which was refused in February 2019. This submission seeks permission for a building of identical design and siting to that previously considered and only seeks to address the previous reason for refusal that concerns matters relating to Policy SS7. The Applicant has appealed the previous refusal with a hearing scheduled for September 2019. Environmental Impact Assessment The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 set out that Environmental Impact Assessment’s (EIA's) are needed for certain developments whereby the proposal is to have a likely significant effect on the environment. The application has been “screened” in accordance with the criteria set out within the Regulations having regard to matters such as the site area, the number of units, and its location. In having regard to the development proposed and in accordance with Regulation 4 of the EIA Regulations, the Local Planning Authority is of the opinion that the development would be unlikely to have significant environmental effects. This is by virtue of the size, scale and characteristics of the development, its location outside of any defined sensitive area, the use of natural resources and the production of waste, pollution and nuisances. Accordingly, it has been concluded that the development would not constitute EIA development and an Environmental Statement was not required to accompany the application in accordance with the 2017 Regulations. Principle of development The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless

material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the Development Plan comprises the policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and places the site within the Settlement Policy Boundary for Tadley. It is also a material consideration that the site has an extant planning permission for the erection of a three storey office building with parking provided to the south of the site. This decision remains capable of implementation.

Provision of housing

Local Plan Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) positively supports the principle of housing redevelopment which contributes towards social, economic and environmental wellbeing. The development would therefore contribute towards the overall requirement to provide 15,300 dwellings and associated infrastructure over the plan period. Therefore, whilst concern has been raised regarding the provision of additional housing in the area, the site is located within a highly sustainable location and would contribute towards meeting the social and economic needs of the community by providing further housing units. Furthermore, the development would make efficient use of land, with the proposed use commensurate with the adjacent residential estate. The proposal therefore accords with the requirements of Local Plan Policy SS1 subject to a detailed assessment of the loss of commercial space, as well as the physical impacts of the development proposed, having regard to other relevant policies of the Local Plan. The acceptability of the proposal, in principle, is additionally mindful that the Council is currently not able to identify a five year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. As such, Policy SS1 is considered to be out of date and therefore it is necessary to have regard to paragraph 11 of the NPPF which applies a presumption in favour of sustainable development and states that permission will be granted. This is unless other policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provide a clear reason for refusing the development proposed, or where 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. This site at Boundary Hall is within a sustainable location and weight can be afforded to this fact, noting that other policies which protect areas or assets of importance do not come in to consideration in this instance. This is a change in policy position since the determination of the previous application at this site under reference 18/01089/FUL, although is not dissimilar to the grant of permission to the wider Boundary Hall site in 2011 under reference BDB/67609. In 2011 the Secretary of State afforded weight to the risk to human health from the development, but outweighed this by the benefits of improving the appearance of the site, providing housing (including affordable housing) in a sustainable location together with public open space given a deficit in five year housing land supply at that time.

Loss of employment premises The development would sit upon land which benefits from an extant planning permission for the erection of a three storey building providing 945m2 of commercial

(Class B1 office) floorspace. Whilst this permission has been implemented in so far as it relates to the residential dwellings, the office building has never been constructed. It remains however that the site does have permission for a Class B1 use and therefore the loss of this employment land does require consideration. Policy EP2 of the Local Plan sets out to protect employment land and premises within Class B uses therefore maintaining a planned long term provision of employment land within the Borough. The policy addresses all employment sites in the Borough and provides for the change of use or redevelopment of land in employment use within defined settlement policy boundaries provided it meets criteria from the policy comprising: d) there are not strong economic reasons why the proposal would be unacceptable

and e) market signals indicate that the site is unlikely to come back into employment

use; and/or f) the site is not appropriate for the continuation of employment use due to the

environment or amenity of the area. In addressing criteria d) the loss of the employment land from the provision in the Borough would be modest in extent. It is therefore difficult to evidence that this loss would have overriding harm to the local economy with the level of harm sufficiently ‘strong’ as to resist the change of use. The proposed residential development would not generate an unacceptable change of use on an economic basis. Criteria e) has been addressed through supporting information submitted to accompany the application to justify the economic reason for the loss of employment land together with details of the marketing exercise carried out. This indicated that the site was initially marketed for the Class B1 use between 2012 – 2014 for the lease or purchase of the property with no interest generated. The reasons for the lack of interest are cited by the applicant as being a challenging market climate at that time, the absence of a building to actually view, the site being in a poor office location and with the development proposal having an under provision of car parking. Notably, whilst the planning permission provided for twenty-six car parking spaces to serve the offices, this was reduced to just eleven for the marketing exercise. The submitted marketing details also state that a second marketing exercise occurred between February 2017 to March 2018 with the only interest generated for the site was for residential redevelopment. This marketing report additionally sets out that the demand for office space remains challenging with there being a ‘plethora of serviced office offers now prevalent in the market…’ which are more attractive to small enterprises. Furthermore it is highlighted that Tadley is in a parochial location with a small working population, that the site is of a limited size, has limited parking, with access on to the A340 Aldermaston Road likely to be difficult at peak travel times. The marketing report concludes that there was ‘no economic reason why this land would ever be used as an office’, that this position was unlikely to change in the future and that ‘the land is not a loss to employment uses…’. On the basis of these details, it is considered that Criteria e) has been met and it is not necessary to consider the proposal against criteria f) due to the ‘and/or’ phrasing within the policy.

The supporting marketing information has been subject of consultation with the Planning Policy team which have raised no objection to the loss of employment land. It is indicated that whilst the Council is cautious about losing employment floorspace, the marketing information demonstrates that this site has been available for a prolonged period of time and remains undeveloped. With there being no realistic prospect of this location generating sufficient rental value to support speculative new build development, the loss of the land is deemed to accord with Policy EP2 of the Local Plan.

NPPF The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policy for England and places an emphases upon delivering sustainable development incorporating objectives for economic, social and environmental protection. These principles seek to balance growth and local needs of the community against protection of the natural, built and historic environment. This intends for development to be provided in accessible locations, to make efficient use of land and be located in proximity to the community which it serves. In having regard to the three objectives of sustainable development, the development site is located within the Settlement Policy Boundary for Tadley which benefits from established public transport and community facilities with Tadley identified as containing a district centre for focusing shopping and other town centre uses. It is acknowledged that the development would result in the loss of commercial space and therefore not provide any form of long term economic development, however there would be economic benefits generated through the construction period with spin offs from wage spending of construction workers and supplier sourcing and following this, consumer spending on goods and services by the occupants of the dwellings benefitting the local economy. The social aspect of sustainable development would be met through the contribution made to the housing stock, particularly of smaller units as affordable housing and would make efficient use of land within the built up area which is presently redundant. The properties would also accord with current requirements for energy efficiency and waste management thus improving the environmental credentials of the site. The development therefore accords with the guidance set out within the NPPF for sustainable development and also the requirements for a presumption in favour of granting sustainable development in paragraph 11. Public Safety 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 [officer emphasis] be 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 site is located within the DEPZ area of AWE Aldermaston positioned approximately 325m from the AWE site boundary and is within Sector H - as the most densely populated sector. The site is also in very in close proximity to Sector J with the boundary running through Penney Way to the west as the second most densely sector. This location determines that the site is more likely to be subject to urgent evacuation in the event of an emergency as well as having an increased requirement for short, medium and potentially long term accommodation, which could also include meeting the needs of vulnerable people.

Planning history – application 18/01089/FUL The application referenced 18/010899/FUL was refused permission in February 2019 with the relationship to AWE and the impact of the development upon the Off Site Emergency Plan forming the sole reason for refusal. This application is now at appeal with a hearing scheduled for September 2019. This decision had regard to objections from the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) Directorate who ‘advised against’ the development following objections received from West Berkshire Council (Emergency Planning) and Hampshire County Council (Emergency Planning). Regard was also given to the receipt of an appeal decision for land at 8 Broad Halfpenny Lane (ref APP/H1705/W/18/3200851 - Feb 2019), where the Inspector agreed with the Council that the proposal would generate an incremental increase in the number of households who would be affected by an incident and that the proposal ‘would adversely impact upon the functioning of the emergency plan in the event of an incident through adding to existing pressures on resources to respond to an incident’. The concerns arising within both the application (18/01089/FUL) and the above appeal addressed the notable uplift in population from new dwellings within an already densely populated area of Tadley placing pressure upon the Off-Site Plan and the resources available to implement this plan in the event of an emergency. This particularly concerned the longer term accommodation needs of the locally resident population following evacuation if a clear up is necessary. This issue would be more acute for the most densely populated sectors. As such, this impact is more notable for a residential development as opposed to office premises where employees would potentially have alternative locations to evacuate to or, if their homes are locally affected then their needs would have already been accounted for within the Off-Site Plan.

Current application Following the determination of application 18/01089/FUL, the applicant has resubmitted an identical scheme in terms of use, siting and design but has provided more extensive supporting information to justify a position whereby a planning permission could be forthcoming. The Applicant’s supporting information has afforded weight to the change in proposed use of the building from office to residential, the potential for the development to be owned and operated by a single

operator and the opportunity to provide a single body (e.g. Management Company) responsible for the occupants in the unlikely event of an emergency. Further information has also analysed the potential exposure of residents within an event, legal opinions on how to control matters relating to an event, an analysis of the consultation responses from the expert bodies and a draft (and subsequently updated) Emergency Action Plan. The information submitted has been subject to extensive discussion with the Emergency Planners at West Berkshire and Hampshire County Council. In these discussions (with written comments to follow at the time of reporting), a position has been reached whereby the provisions being put forward could provide a suitable strategy for sheltering and longer term resettlement, without adding to the resources of the responsible emergency authorities. This position would take the form of submitting a further updated Emergency Management Plan to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the Emergency Planners. This Plan would be secured within a S106 Agreement together with requirements for periodic review, and details of how the Plan would be funded to enable it to be maintained and implemented by an independent management company for so long as the residential units are in occupation. The Management Company would then take on the responsibility for the longer term resettlement should evacuation be deemed necessary and would ensure that all occupants of the development are accounted for, regardless of whether these reside in market or affordable housing. This proposal for managing an emergency situation has (verbally) been deemed acceptable given the unique circumstances of this particular development, whereby an extant planning permission exists for the commercial building. The approach to be secured for dealing with an emergency event would therefore have no greater impact upon the emergency responders than if the building were a commercial unit and therefore the development can be accommodated in the Off-Site Plan. The proposal would therefore provide a mechanism to provide for the accommodation needs of a displaced resident population and would accord with the requirements of Policy SS7 of the Local Plan and the NPPF which seeks to protect public safety. Affordable housing Affordable housing provision is a corporate priority for the Council as set out in the Council Plan 2016 - 2020 to ensure that those households in need are able to access housing in the borough. Policy CN1 of the Local Plan therefore requires the provision of 40% affordable housing as part of new residential development with a tenure split of 70% rented and 30% intermediate products, or where applicable, secure a financial contribution of equivalent value. Policy CN1 continues by stating that ‘in seeking affordable housing provision, the council will have regard to the current viability of developments…’. In considering the proposed development of seventeen units, a 40% provision would equate to seven units. Both applications of 18/01089/FUL and 19/00579/FUL were accompanied by a Financial Viability Assessment which sets out that the development would offer a minimum return at a level just enough to incentivise the pursuit of planning permission and the release of the land for development. However the applicant has stated that the inclusion of providing affordable housing on the site would reduce the

return to the landowner to a point that the scheme becomes financially unviable. The financial details provided at under 18/01089/FUL were subject to independent review commissioned by the Local Planning Authority. This independent review confirmed that the development could provide a quantum of affordable housing of four units or alternatively an off-site financial contribution, albeit both options would remain below the planning policy requirement. The independent review was subject to further discussion regarding the inputs and calculations made with the applicant agreeing instead to provide five units with these to be secured for affordable rent only. This position remains unchanged within the context of this current application. Notwithstanding this provision of five units, the applicant has supported the application with details that the development site (with a planning permission) would be purchased, built out and delivered by a Registered Housing Provider, Radian Housing to provide 100% affordable housing using grant funding to convert the twelve market units into affordable housing. The applicant was previously challenged as to why the full policy compliant quantum of affordable housing could be secured within a legal agreement given that the development is to be delivered for affordable housing in any event. The applicant has maintained their position of agreeing to provide only five affordable units indicating that to secure the permission for 100% affordable housing would prevent the Registered Provider from being able to apply for grant funding from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) which is only available to units purchased outside of any Section 106 agreement. It is understood that this position is akin to a Registered Housing Provider purchasing existing built housing stock rather than a development site which benefits from planning permission. The applicant also relies on a position whereby had the interest expressed by Radian Housing not been revealed to the Local Planning Authority, then just five units would have been deemed acceptable as a net benefit against a position of no on site affordable housing being secured. The position regarding affordable housing has remained consistent between the two applications for this site and when determining 18/01089/FUL, no reason for refusal was issued on housing grounds. It remains that there is clear evidence of housing need in the Borough and more specifically, in the Tadley area whereas of the 14th November 2018 a total of 200 households were on the Council’s housing register seeking social rented accommodation. The greatest need is for one bedroom units, followed by two bedroom units. On this basis, no objection has been raised by Housing to securing only five units (for affordable rent) by way of a S106 rather than the policy compliant requirement for seven units, given that at least some provision is guaranteed. In accounting for matters of viability, the provision is deemed acceptable having regard to Policy CN1 of the Local Plan. Housing Mix Policy CN3 requires developments to provide a range of units to address local requirements, with the mix to be appropriate to the size, location, density and character of the site and surrounding area. The policy also requires that the mix is to be supported by evidence to justify the proposed housing mix, with the supporting

text stating this is to be based on an assessment of “a range of sources of housing evidence”. The development proposes the delivery of two 1-bedroom flats and fifteen 2-bedroom flats. No evidence has been provided to justify the mix which comprises flats however no objection has been raised to the provision of smaller units. This recognises that the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2015 highlights a great need for one, two and three bedroom units therefore this proposal would accord with this requirement. No objection is therefore raised to the mix provided however it is notable that all seventeen units are all identical in their layout and size, with the one bedroom flats simply having the second bedroom marked as a ‘study’. It would therefore be reasonable if permission had been forthcoming to include an informative to advise the applicant that the 1-bedroom units should be retained as such in perpetuity. In addition to housing mix, Policies CN1 and CN3 require provision of 15% of the provided homes (both market and affordable) to comprise ‘accessible and adaptable homes’ to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change. In the absence of any such units (of either description) being illustrated within the application submission, such provision would have been secured via planning condition. 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 and that decisions should add to the overall quality of the area in the long term and should be visually attractive, sympathetic to the local character and establish a strong sense of place. Locally, Policy EM10 of the Local Plan advocates a high quality and robust design-led approach to new development. In particular, the policy requires that development must ‘positively contribute to the appearance and use of streets’ (criteria 1b), ‘respond to the local context’ (criteria 1c), contribute ‘to a sense of place’ (criteria 2a) and have ‘due regard to’ the density, scale, layout and appearance of the surrounding area (criteria 2c). The site is located within Tadley whereby the character of the area is defined by a mix of residential properties of two and three storeys together with local facilities in buildings of single and two storey heights sitting to the south west of the highway. The street scene presently has a medium density character with the application site forming an area of undeveloped land between the highway and the properties which surround the site. This currently provides an open aspect into the development at Boundary Place, although this is only by virtue of the unimplemented development for this site where permission remains extant for the erection of a three storey building with single storey additions totalling 37.40m in length by 14.30m in width and rising to 11.5m sitting under a shallow pitched roof. The building was to be arranged to have access from the courtyard to the south west at Boundary Place and have fenestration to the northeast, south west and south east elevations with a blank elevation facing properties at Penney Way to the north west.

The submitted scheme is identical to the submission addressed under application referenced 18/01089/FUL which, following amendments at that time, was considered to be of a scale and massing commensurate with the extant permission and would not overdevelop the site. The ridgeline has been broken up and the frontage is articulated with bay windows topped by gables and a series of projecting porch canopies. The elevational treatment lends itself to a more traditional appearance with the detailing and materials being more in keeping with the appearance of Tadley with use of tile hanging, a projecting plinth, arched brick headers, chimneys, external doors and a variety of window sizes. The materials, with use of render with brickwork and tile hanging, provides a tonal contrast to the external appearance and an improved relationship to the character of the area to that of the original proposal. Whilst the development would result in a notable change in the street scene to the existing scenario, such a change has always been envisaged by virtue of the extant permission. The scheme now presented is deemed to be of a higher quality to that originally submitted and had permission been recommended, a condition would have been imposed to secure the materials and detailing. With conditions in place, the development would accord with the requirements of Policy EM10 of the Local Plan and the Tadley Design Statement. Impact on neighbouring amenities Policy EM10 considers the effect of development upon residential amenity (both to existing and new residents) addressing aspects such as privacy and private open space, light, noise and disturbance. 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.

Proposed residential units The development would provide seventeen flats arranged over three floors with the relationship of these units providing an outlook to the northeast, southeast and southwest. The units however are not provided with any external amenity space with no balconies or external communal space, with the only space remaining fronting onto Aldermaston Road as a landscape strip. Whilst this does sit contrary to the Design and Sustainability SPD which sets out balconies should be provided, the traditional design would be adversely interrupted with the inclusion of balconies and notably the site does have a close relationship to public open space at Penney Way which weighs in favour of the proposal. It is therefore not considered that a refusal on amenity grounds could be justified. In terms of daylight and sunlight, the increased width of the building to that previously granted permission for the site brings habitable spaces closer to the English Oak trees that front the highway to the north east. As such, the flats at the upper levels would have an outlook into the canopy of the trees which in turn would impact upon daylight and sunlight. Amendments to the scheme did increase the space between the canopy and the building, but only by 0.60m which would not have any significant benefit upon the shading effect and could result in pressure to fell in the future.

The application was therefore accompanied by an internal Daylight Assessment which indicated that most rooms affected by the trees would achieve an acceptable level of daylight in winter in accordance with Building Research Establishment Guidelines. The only exception would be to three ground floor rooms which achieve an annual Average Daylight Factor values of 0.1% below the Guidelines. This amount however is so minor, it is not deemed to be material. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan for the purposes of considering the new units.

Neighbouring properties Representations to the application have raised concern to the impact of the siting, scale and massing of the development upon matters of outlook, privacy and daylight/sunlight from the siting and massing of the proposed development upon properties in Boundary Place to the south west and Penney Way to the north. It is not disputed that the proposal would impact upon residential amenity to the nearest properties, particularly those to the north west that have rear gardens abutting the site and to the south west which have to date enjoyed views across a vacant site, albeit a right to a view is not a material planning consideration. The impact of this building upon neighbouring residential amenity does however need to have regard to the impacts that could otherwise occur if the extant planning permission for the commercial building were to be implemented, as the fall-back position. In addressing outlook, the new building would occupy a similar position to that already permitted having a close proximity to the boundary with numbers 10 – 16 Penney Way, with the most notable change being the increase in width. This would result in new impacts upon number 16 with the proposed building extending across the rear boundary and interrupting the outlook in a southerly direction. This outlook would be replaced by the single storey covered cycle store with the 2.5 storey massing set beyond at approximately 2.60m from the boundary and approximately 14m from the rear elevations of properties in Penney Way. This is comparable to the extant scheme which also had the single storey mass at 2.8m from the boundary and the three storey elevation at 14m from the rear elevations. Given the retention of the same intervening distances, which are also the same to that previously deemed acceptable within application 18/01089/FUL, it is not considered that any reason for refusal on the grounds of harm to outlook or overbearing could be justified. The proposed flats are articulated with fenestration on all elevations. To the properties in Penney Way, the facing (northwest) elevation contains two high level, obscurely glazed windows which would not give rise to adverse levels of privacy and could have been conditioned to remain as such. The roofslope above similarly contains a high level rooflight which would minimise adverse harm upon privacy. New oblique views would however be gained towards the rear gardens of Penney Way from first and second floor windows. Windows to the south west elevation would principally have views towards the rear parking courtyard but also towards rear gardens of 2 – 8 Penney Way with the intervening distances in excess of 20m which is deemed acceptable in this location. New views, again at an oblique angle, would also be gained towards 8-10 Penney Way from a first floor bedroom window in the north-westerly unit. Internally this window is positioned within an alcove rather than having any wide ‘open’ outlook and, with the views sitting at an angle, the area

of adjacent gardens affected are likely to already be overlooked by windows in the existing residential properties. As such, it is not considered that the impacts of oblique views are of such overriding demonstrable harm as to warrant refusal. The building would also have a relationship with the flats of Boundary Place to the south west with front to front intervening distances of approximately 12.6m. Local representations have raised this distance as a concern with the potential for intervening views into habitable rooms between respective facing windows. In considering this impact, the Design and Sustainability SPD (2018) states that ‘there are no minimum distances between the fronts of dwellings across a street’ and advises that each case ‘will be examined on its merits’. In considering this proposal, the front to front relationship is not dissimilar to that already granted planning permission at the site, albeit between a commercial building and the same residential flats, at an approved distance of approximately 12.40m. With the planning permission for the commercial building not having any restrictions upon the operating hours such as controlled by any planning condition, persons could have otherwise been present within the offices 24 hours a day. Therefore the impact would not be significantly dissimilar to the residential use proposed. Furthermore, this distance is not dissimilar to the front to front relationships approved within the wider site, for instance with front to front distances for properties in Royal Gardens to the south west extending to between 10 – 13m. As such, it is considered that whilst this relationship is close, it would not be possible to substantiate a reason for refusal on the grounds of overlooking and loss of privacy. Finally in addressing matters of light, the extant permission would have cast shade across the rear gardens of the dwellings to Penney Way with shadows moving across the morning hours and into the afternoon. The proposed development would cast a similar path of shade but of a reduced extent due to the lower height of the proposed building by approximately 2m. The impact of the new shadow would again not warrant a reason for refusal given the fall-back position. Concern has also been raised regarding the impact upon light to Boundary Place and again the impact upon daylight and sunlight to the flats would be similar to that which would have otherwise been cast by the commercial building given the proximity and orientation of the built form. In concluding on matters of residential amenity, there was no refusal on amenity grounds issued within the determination of application 18/01089/FUL. With the relationship to neighbouring properties and the design of the building remaining identical to this previous scheme it is not possible to demonstrate that any new demonstrable harm arises upon the amenity of existing dwellings. To refuse this latest application on amenity grounds would therefore be determined as unreasonable in planning terms therefore the proposal is considered to accord with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan.

Noise and disturbance Policy EM12 gives consideration to development which is sensitive to pollution (e.g. noise) from existing land uses and activities which would adversely harm living conditions and be detrimental to quality of life. The NPPF (para. 180) also seeks to ensure that the planning system should avoid the generation of “unacceptable levels”

of noise pollution where this would give rise to “significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life” or harm to areas that are relatively undisturbed by noise. The location of the site is not divorced from a level of background noise generated by the levels of traffic using Aldermaston Road as well as the surrounding residential estate whereby the properties would experience noise generated by the local vehicular movement and domestic activities. To address the potential impacts of noise from the adjacent land uses, the application was accompanied by a noise assessment which has been accepted by Environmental Health. However it has been considered that suggested mitigation measures to provide an adequate internal living environment require further examination as these are deemed to be inadequate. Had the proposal been acceptable in other regards, a scheme to protect the flats would have been secured by planning condition. Further conditions would have also been imposed to restrict the hours of construction and for deliveries to respect the amenities of residential properties in the vicinity of the site during the construction phase. With conditions in place, it’s not considered that residents would be subject to a level of noise of adverse harm to human health as to justify refusal of planning permission and the proposal accords with Policy EM12 of the Local Plan. Highways and Parking Policy CN9 (Transport) requires that highway movements are not of an inappropriate type or level as to compromise highway safety with safe and convenient access to be provided for potential users through a compatible on site layout with appropriate parking and servicing provision. The need for on-site parking is additionally reflected within Policy EM10 with respect to ensuring that the amount, design, layout and location accords with parking standards as set out within the Parking Standards SPD.

Traffic generation The site has an extant permission for office development which would have generated a level of vehicular movements, and similarly a residential use would also bring new traffic to the site which has been a subject of concern raised through the representations. It is however considered that a residential use would not generate any greater or adverse level of traffic that would harm the local and wider highway network. The area is additionally served by public transport, and local facilities are also within easy reach by cycle thus providing alternatives to use of the car. The development would also generate a level of traffic associated within the construction of the proposed building, with likely peaks in the mornings and evenings and with larger vehicles also required to visit the site. Had the development been deemed acceptable, a planning condition would have been imposed to seek a Construction Traffic Management Plan to address the traffic generated both on and off site for this temporary period to ensure that highway safety is maintained. Therefore with no material impact upon the highway network, which is capable of accommodating traffic movements to and from the site, the proposal is therefore considered to accord with Policy CN9 of the Local Plan.

Access The development site is accessed via Aldermaston Road with the access serving the surrounding residential development and commercial unit to the south east. This access is established and when granted permission would have also been envisaged to serve the commercial development at this site. The provision of residential units does not require any alteration to the access and the siting of the building would maintain highway visibility along Aldermaston Road.

Parking The site is situated within the ‘Outer Urban’ area for the purposes of assessing NPPF Sustainable Transport Modes and the provision of residential motor vehicle and secure cycle parking provision plus refuse/recycling facilities. In accordance with the Parking SPD, the development would be expected to provide 25 parking spaces with more than 50% unallocated or 29 spaces with at least 20% unallocated. The development has been provided with 25 parking spaces (details of allocation not provided) within an existing courtyard arrangement (originally allocated to serve the commercial building) and within an undercroft parking area. Cycle parking is additionally provided on site with covered storage to the northwest elevation. The development therefore accords with the Parking SPD in terms of the minimum quantum of parking required. Furthermore the site is within a sustainable location with access to public transport and community facilities in the local area in order to minimise the need to rely on a private vehicle. The parking provision on site has been amended during the course of considering the application to ensure that parking spaces where possible are of dimensions that accord with the new parking standards adopted in July 2018. The only deficiency in size occurs within the existing walled parking courtyard where the spaces were approved under the extant permission, however accessibility to these spaces is to be improved through removal of the walled enclosure therefore facilitating manoeuvrability on site. The reuse of the parking spaces previously allocated to serve the commercial building has been the subject of objection as expressed through the representations in relation to concerns regarding an alleged overall deficiency of parking across the wider Boundary Place development. The parking provision for the residential units was assessed against former parking standards which were less onerous than those in place at the point of submission of this application, and also the latest standards adopted in July 2018. When granting permission for the development, the level of parking provided for the residential units was deemed acceptable. The residential development has to date however benefitted from the use of the parking spaces allocated to the commercial building which has never been constructed. This situation could have changed at any time and had the building been erected, there was no restriction on operating hours therefore the parking could have been in use at all times removing this availability from the residential units. A refusal based on the overall parking provision on site cannot therefore be substantiated.

The provision of the parking on site together with the manoeuvrability for vehicles of all sizes likely to attend the premises has been considered acceptable by the Highways Officer and its delivery is secured by planning condition. The development therefore is considered to accord with Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Local Plan. Storage and Collection of Waste and Recycling

The development would be expected to provide storage for waste and recycling in accordance with standards set out within the Design and Sustainability SPD (Appendix 3). In response communal storage is provided within an enclosed bin store that can be easily accessed by waste operatives. Notwithstanding this provision, objection has been raised to the application from the Joint Waste Client Team stating that it is unclear where the bin store is located and that there is an absence of a swept path analysis or waste collection strategy. In response, the Bin Store is clearly illustrated on the plans provided and a swept path analysis did accompany the application. With no reason for refusal previously issued on matters of waste storage and collection, it would be unreasonable to refuse this repeat application on these grounds. The provision of waste storage and collection is therefore conditioned to ensure its provision prior to the occupation of the development to ensure that the proposal accords with the SPD as well as Policies CN9 and EM10 with regard to matters of waste. Natural Environment 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. The site is not located within an area designated for its landscape qualities or tranquillity, nor does the site contain any trees protected by Tree Preservation Orders. The site has limited natural features, but does have a close relationship to the row of English Oak trees which front the highway and have high amenity value to the street scene. The development has been the subject of objection from the Tree Officer with respect to the relationship of the development to the English Oak trees that front the highway and sit within close proximity to the site. These trees will have an impact on the amenity of the north facing units which was a matter given consideration in the initial application 18/01089/FUL, whereby the building was re-sited to increase the distance to the canopies. This re-siting sought to improve the space available for the retention of the trees in the long term and to reduce the pressure to prune or fell due to shading. The final scheme was not subject to an objection from the Tree Officer therefore no reason for refusal was issued on arboricultural grounds. This current application retains the building in the same position therefore, whilst an objection has been received to this current submission, it would be unreasonable to refuse permission based solely on the adoption of the Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD (2018) in the intervening time. It is however considered necessary to ensure that these trees receive protection during the construction period and that the site is also landscaped, with a landscape management programme also in place, which is secured by condition to ensure compliance with Policy EM1 of the Local Plan.

Biodiversity The Council has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) 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 with an emphasis placed upon conservation and enhancement. The application was accompanied by a preliminary ecological assessment which concludes that there are no statutory or non-statuary nature conservation designations present within or adjacent to the site, nor is the site likely to support any protected or notable species. The preliminary ecological assessment has been deemed acceptable by the Biodiversity Officer subject to securing ecological enhancements. Such mitigation is secured by planning condition to ensure compliance with Policy EM4 of the Local Plan. Land contamination Local Plan Policy EM12 seeks to protect health and the natural environment from polluting effects as a result of existing, historic or nearby land uses and activities. On the grounds that housing development is sensitive to the impacts of soil contamination, the application was accompanied by a land contamination report which was subject to review by Environmental Health. It has been recommended that, given historic potentially contaminating land uses at this site, further ground investigation works are required together with a scheme of remediation,. This requirement can be secured by planning condition. The proposal is therefore considered to 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 recommended to secure this standard and to ensure compliance with Policy EM9 of the Local Plan. Flood Risk and Drainage 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.

Flooding

The Environment Agency Flood Risk Maps position the site as lying wholly within Flood Zone 1 giving the site a low risk of flooding (less than 1 in 1000 annual probability). The site has therefore not been the subject of objection on fluvial flood risk grounds and is deemed, on a sequential basis, to be an appropriate location for the development with no impact upon conveyance of fluvial flood flows or floodplain storage capacity off site. The site is also at a low risk of ground water and pluvial flooding and is located outside of any locally designated critical drainage area. The site has therefore not been the subject of objection on fluvial flood risk grounds and is deemed, on a sequential basis, to be an appropriate location for redevelopment.

Surface Drainage The existing use of the site is provided with surface and foul water drainage however with the site to be redeveloped, the building would be provided with a new drainage regime. The application was therefore supported by a drainage strategy which was subject to review by the Lead Local Flood Authority which addressed initial concerns raised to the application. With no objection to the proposed drainage also from Thames Water, the proposal is considered to be acceptable on the grounds of flooding and drainage and the proposal accords with Policy EM7 of the Local Plan.

Foul drainage and water supply The servicing of the residential properties with a foul drainage system would require agreement with Thames Water as the statutory undertaker under the Water Industries Act 1991. This Act imposes a duty to ensure that flows resulting from new development do not cause detriment to the existing public sewerage networks with duties to accommodate such flows into their networks. This legal mechanism sits outside of the planning process. The provision of a water supply would again be the statutory responsibility of South East Water through agreement also secured under Water Industries Act 1991. Community Infrastructure Requirements Policies CN1, CN6 and CN8 of the Local Plan and the accompanying Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018) seek to ensure that new development does not result in an adverse effect on existing infrastructure, and makes appropriate provision to mitigate documented impacts. The application has been scoped and contributions are sought towards:

Affordable Housing – securing five units for affordable rent.

Open Space – Provision of enhanced facilities at Wigmore Heath The mitigation sought is deemed to accord with the tests as set out within the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2015, namely that a planning obligation must be (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. In the absence of securing these contributions, the application is refused on the grounds of failing to meet the requirements for

affordable housing and offsite infrastructure and is contrary to Policies CN1, CN6 and CN8 of the Local Plan and the Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018). 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 liable for any CIL payments however would attract a £Nil payment because the development is for a wholly flatted scheme. Other Matters

Other matters raised

The application has been subject to a number of objections raised through the representations. This considers issues such as loss of property value, impacts upon harmony between occupants, loss of a view, matters relating to an onsite covenant, the need for improving shops or providing a park for employees in the area. Whilst these concerns are noted, weight cannot be afforded to the issues raised in the decision-taking process as these are either non material planning considerations, private matters or are outside of the control of the planning process.

Pre-commencement planning conditions The recommendation proposes a number of 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 will serve notice upon the applicant to seek agreement to the imposition of such conditions and an update will be reported on the Update Paper. Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in substantial

accordance with the following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Location Plan - drawing 061702-BP-03 Rev B

Front Elevation - drawing 061702-B1-E1 Rev B

Side Elevations - drawing 061702-B1-E2 Rev B

Rear Elevation - drawing 061702-B1-E3 Rev C

Ground Floor Plan – drawing 061702-B1-P1 Rev D

First Floor Plan – drawing 061702-B1-P2 Rev B

Second Floor Plan - drawing 061702-B1-P3 Rev A

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 51 of the Planning and Compulsory

Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3. No development (including site clearance or ground works) until a Construction Environmental Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan must demonstrate the adoption and use of the best practicable means to reduce the effects of noise, vibration, dust and site lighting. The plan should include, but not be limited to:

Procedures for maintaining good public relations including complaint management, public consultation and liaison;

Arrangements for liaison with the Council’s Environmental Protection Team;

All works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary, or at such other place as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be carried out only between the following hours: 0730 Hours and 18 00 Hours on Mondays to Fridays and 08 00 and 13 00 Hours on Saturdays and; at no time on Sundays, Public and Bank Holidays;

Deliveries to and removal of plant, equipment, machinery and waste from the site must only take place within the permitted hours detailed above.

Mitigation measures as defined in BS 5528: Parts 1 and 2: 2009 Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites shall be used to minimise noise disturbance from construction works.

Procedures for emergency deviation of the agreed working hours;

Control measures for dust and other air-borne pollutants;

Measures for controlling the use of site lighting whether required for safe working or for security purposes.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior to the commencement of development in the absence of satisfactory information accompanying the application and to protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period in accordance with Policies EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4. No development (including site clearance or ground works) until a Construction

Method Statement, including all relevant drawings, that demonstrate safe and coordinated systems of work affecting or likely to affect the surrounding movement network and or all motorised and or non-motorised highway users, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Statement shall include for: i. means of access (temporary or permanent) to the site from the adjoining

maintainable public highway; ii. the parking and turning of vehicles of site operatives and visitors off

carriageway (all to be established within one week of the commencement of development);

iii. loading and unloading of plant and materials away from the maintainable public highway;

iv. storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development away from the maintainable public highway;

v. wheel washing facilities or an explanation why they are not necessary; vi. the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative

displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; vii. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction; viii. a scheme for recycling and disposing of waste resulting from construction

work; and the management and coordination of deliveries of plant and materials and the disposing of waste resulting from construction activities so as to avoid undue interference with the operation of the public highway, particularly during the Monday to Friday AM peak (06.30 to 09.30) and PM peak (16.00 to 18.30) periods.

ix. the routes to be used by construction traffic to access and egress the site so as to avoid undue interference with the safety and operation of the public highway and adjacent roads, including construction traffic holding areas both on and off the site as necessary.

The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Statement and shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. REASON: In the absence of such details being provided within the planning submission, details are required prior to commencement to ensure that the construction process is undertaken in a safe and convenient manner that limits impact on local roads and the amenities of nearby occupiers, the area generally, in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

5. No works (including site clearance or ground works) pursuant to this permission

shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:- (a) 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.

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 Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11’. The development shall be carried out in accordance with any approved remediation scheme. 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.

6. 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 5(b) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 5(b) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Such verification shall comprise;

as built drawings of the implemented scheme;

photographs of the remediation works in progress;

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 5(c). 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.

7. No development (including site clearance and ground works) shall take place

until a detailed surface water drainage strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Lead Local Flood Authority, that contains the following elements:

Manhole cover and Invert levels, Pipe sizes and gradients and confirmed location and sizing of any SuDs attenuation features.

A full set of Hydraulic calculations to support the surface water strategy. (Calculations must include allowance for additional 10% Urban Creep)

Evidence that the water authority accepts the additional flows into the public surface water sewers.

Maintenance regimes of the entire surface water drainage system including individual SuDS features, including a plan illustrating the organisation responsible for each element.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required prior the commencement of development in the absence of satisfactory details having been submitted to accompany the planning application and to ensure that the site does not generate adverse levels of surface water run-off in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

8. No development above slab level shall take place on site until a scheme for

protecting the proposed dwellings from road traffic noise has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The proposed scheme shall achieve the following noise levels: a) Internal day time (0700 - 2300) noise levels shall not exceed 35dB LAeq, 16hr for habitable rooms (bedrooms and living rooms with windows open) b) Internal night time (2300 - 0700) noise levels shall not exceed 30dB LAeq with individual noise events not exceeding 45dB LAmax (windows open). If it is predicted that the internal noise levels specified above will not be met with windows open, the proposed mitigation scheme shall assume windows would be kept closed, and will specify an alternative rapid/purge ventilation system, to

reduce the need to open windows. As a minimum, this will usually consist of a mechanical heat recovery ventilation system with cool air by pass or equivalent. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details for protecting the proposed dwellings from road traffic noise prior to first occupation and shall be retained and maintained thereafter. REASON: To ensure that acceptable noise levels within the dwellings are not exceeded in the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

9. No dwelling shall be occupied until a post completion noise survey has been

undertaken by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant, and a report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The post completion testing shall assess performance of the noise mitigation measures against the noise levels as set in condition 8. A method statement should be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the survey being undertaken, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that acceptable noise levels within the dwellings are not exceeded in the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

10. 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 08:00 nor after 1300 on Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised bank or public holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

11. No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, or internal painting 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 on Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised bank or public holidays. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

12. No shrubs shall be removed from the site between 1 March and 31 August

unless first checked by an ecologist for active birds nests. If a nest is discovered, the tree or shrub must not be removed until the young have left the nest which shall be confirmed by an ecologist. REASON: The habitats to be removed during the proposed development have the potential to support nesting birds. Breeding birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and to ensure accordance with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

13. No development above ground floor slab level shall commence until details of

the materials and finishes for the external surfaces to be used together with samples 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 because insufficient and inconsistent 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.

14. 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 and shall comprise the following as a minimum:

Soft landscape details shall include 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.

Hard landscape details shall include the design, type, position and scale of boundary treatments, and hardsurfacing materials.

A programme of landscape implementation.

The approved hard and soft landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and implementation programme with the soft landscaping scheme to be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the development. 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: Details are required in the absence of being included within the application submission, to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a high standard of landscape and to ensure that reasonable measures are taken to establish trees in accordance with the approved designs and in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

15. No development above ground floor slab level shall commence until a

Landscape Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailing 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. The maintenance of the landscaping shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: Details are required in the absence of being included within the application submission and to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs and in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

16. A minimum of 15% of the properties shall be built to accessible and adaptable

standards to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change. No development above ground floor slab level shall commence on site until details of which properties are to be built to such standards are submitted to and

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure an appropriate high quality form of development and to accord with Policies CN1 and CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. Details are required in the absence of being provided to accompany the planning submission.

17. No development above ground floor slab level shall commence on site until a

Construction Statement detailing how the new homes shall meet a water efficiency standard of 110 litres or less per person per day (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority through a demonstration that this requirement for sustainable water use cannot be achieved on technical or viability grounds) 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. 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.

18. No development (including site clearance and ground works) shall take place on

site until tree protection has been erected or installed in accordance with the Tree Protection Plan (dwg no 9831 TPP 01 Rev B) within the Arboricultural Impact Assessment by Aspect Arboriculture dated February 2019 (ref 9831_AIA.001 Rev V). The tree protection shall be retained for the duration of the construction phase. REASON: To ensure protection of the road-side trees during the course of construction in the interests of amenity and biodiversity in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029.

19. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations

and procedures contained within Chapter 6 Mitigation Measures and Ecological Enhancements of the Ecological Appraisal by Aspect Ecology dated February 2019. REASON: In order to mitigate the impacts of the development upon the ecological interest provided by the offsite Oak Trees and to prevent adverse impacts on key mammal species in line with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029.

20. No development shall occur on site above slab level until details have been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the type and siting of bird nesting and bat roosting boxes as well as swift bricks to be installed on the site. The bat and bird boxes as well as the swift bricks shall be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development. REASON: In the absence of satisfactory details being submitted to accompany the application, details are required to secure the protection of species protected under The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

21. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied, or the approved use commence, whichever is the sooner, until provision for the storage and collection of all refuse and recycling has been made within the curtilage of the site. The areas so provided shall be retained and used for their intended purposes in perpetuity. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Appendix 3 – Storage and Collection of Waste and Recycling of the Basingstoke and Deane Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018) and Policy CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

22. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until provision has

been made for the parking of motor vehicles and cycles within the curtilage of the site in accordance with the approved plans together with transit routes to the public highway. The areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purpose other than for the parking of vehicles and the areas so provided shall be retained and kept free of obstructions and used for their intended purpose at all times. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

23.

No development above ground floor slab level shall commence until a scheme for the provision of Electric Vehicle Charging has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then proceed in full accordance with the approved scheme. 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 paragraph 110(e) of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

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


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.



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

application; - considering the imposition of conditions (in accordance with paragraphs 54-

55).

In this instance: - the applicant was updated of any issues.


3. Consent under the Town and Country Planning Acts must not be taken as

approval for any works carried out within or over any footway, including a Public Right of Way, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the publicly maintained highway. The development will involve works within the public highway. It is an offence to commence those works without the permission of the Local Highway Authority. In the interests of highway safety the development must not commence on-site until permission has been obtained from the Local Highway Authority authorising any necessary works, including street lighting and surface water drainage, within the publicly maintained highway. Public Utility apparatus may also be affected by the development. Contact the appropriate public utility service to ensure agreement on any necessary alterations. Advice about works within the public highway can be obtained from Hampshire County Council's Area Office, telephone 0845 603 5633.

4. All bat species are protected under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.)

Regulations 2010 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Legal protection covers bats and elements of their habitats. A Low Impact European Protected Species Licence will be required in order to allow prohibited activities, such as disturbing bats or damaging their breeding sites or resting places, for the purpose of development. It would be advisable to contact Natural England for further information in this regard on 0845 601 4523.

5. Birds nests, when occupied or being built, receive legal protection under the

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is highly advisable to undertake clearance of potential bird nesting habitat (such as hedges, scrub, trees, suitable outbuildings etc.) outside the bird nesting season, which is generally seen as extending from March to the end of August, although may

extend longer depending on local conditions. If there is absolutely no alternative to doing the work in during this period then a thorough, careful and quiet examination of the affected area must be carried out before clearance starts. If occupied nests are present then work must stop in that area, a suitable (approximately 5m) stand-off maintained, and clearance can only recommence once the nest becomes unoccupied of its own accord.

6. 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 [email protected] to commence the process. Details can be found on the council's website.

7. Details submitted to satisfy Condition 7 should fulfil the requirements set out

within the comments received to the application from Hampshire County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority dated 28 March 2019. For further guidance, the Lead Local Flood Authority offers a Surface Water Management Pre-application service which will provide clear guidance on what information is required. For full details, please visit:

https://www.hants.gov.uk/landplanningandenvironment/environment/flooding/ planning and click on pre-application advice request form.

8. 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.

9. The Applicant is advised that in relation to condition 16, accessibility and

adaptability standards are achieved by meeting requirement M4(2) or M4(3) of the Building Regulations 2015 or any subsequent government standard.

10. This Decision Notice must be read in conjunction with a Planning Obligation

completed under the terms of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). You are advised to satisfy yourself that you have all the relevant documentation.

11. There are water mains crossing or located close to the development. Thames

Water do NOT permit the building over or construction within 3m of water mains. If significant works are planned near the mains (within 3m), Thames Water will need to check that the development doesn't reduce capacity, limit repair or maintenance activities during and after construction, or inhibit the services we provide in any other way. The applicant is advised to read the guide for working near or diverting pipes. https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Developing-a-large-site/Planning-your-development/Working-near-or-diverting-our-pipes. Further information is available by emailing [email protected].

12. The proposed studies to the dwellings marked on the Second Floor Plan

(drawing 061702-B1-P3) must be marketed/sold/leased as illustrated on the approved plans and not be identified as bedrooms to ensure that the development retains parking commensurate with the size of the unit in accordance with the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018).


https://protect-eu.mimecast.com/s/6Oe-CvlAACX3Z2SAisXT?domain=developers.thameswater.co.uk

https://protect-eu.mimecast.com/s/6Oe-CvlAACX3Z2SAisXT?domain=developers.thameswater.co.uk


App No.: 19/00579/FUL

Location plan

App No.: 19/00579/FUL

Block Plan

App No.: 19/00579/FUL

Comparison of extant and proposed

schemes

Extant scheme Proposed scheme

App No.: 19/00579/FUL

Elevations

Northeast elevation to Aldermaston Road

South west elevation to Boundary Place

South east elevation Northwest elevation

App No.: 19/00579/FUL

Floor plans

Ground floor plan

First floor plan

Second floor plan

Minor Applications Cttee: 7 August 2019

Item No. 4



Site Address Butlers Farm Gangbridge Lane St Mary Bourne SP11 6EP

Proposal Erection of 1no three bedroom dwelling with new access, associated parking and landscaping

Registered: 3 December 2018 Expiry Date: 11 March 2019



Case Officer: Trevor Campbell-Smith 01256 845661

Applicant: Llewellyn Harker Lowe

Agent: Mr Jonathan Harker

Ward: Burghclere, Highclere And St Mary Bourne

Ward Member(s): Cllr John Izett Cllr Graham Falconer

Parish: ST MARY BOURNE CP

OS Grid Reference: 441497 151049

Recommendation: the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1 The proposed development results in a new dwelling in the countryside,

outside any Settlement Policy Boundary which would cause harm to the character and appearance of the St. Mary Bourne Conservation Area, by virtue of the intrusion of built form into the rural undeveloped fringe of the Conservation Area with no public benefit to weigh against the harm. This is in conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) and Policies SS6 and EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policy P7 of the St Mary Bourne Neighbourhood Plan (November 2017) and the Heritage Supplementary Planning Document (March 2019).

General Comments: This application is before the committee at the request of Councillor Falconer for the following reason: "I think I will refer this to committee assuming that you are to recommend refusal. The main reason is to test again the SMB NP. Strangely the parish council has stated no objection but point out that much of it is outside of the NP, in particular it is not a redundant farm site. However, the NP is based upon affordable homes for young local people and for dwellings which allow residents to downsize. This is an example of the latter.


All of the neighbours have lodged their support which is quite unusual with an application to build a dwelling in a field. I would like DC to consider the following: acceptance would indicate that sensitive development can take place even though it does not comply entirely with the NP. Refusal would indicate that there can be no development other than redundant farm sites or within the existing linear villages of SMB and Stoke." Planning Policy The application site lies outside any Settlement Policy Boundary and is within the St Mary Bourne and Stoke Conservation Area and also lies within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. In addition the majority of the site lies within a Mineral Consultation Area, and the southern part of the site lies within Flood Zones 2 and 3. The site also lies within Groundwater Protection Zones 2 and 3. To the east of the site the barn and farmhouse at Butlers farm are Grade II Listed Buildings while the dwelling at Rowe Farmhouse is a Notable Building in the Conservation Area. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (July 2018) Section 1 (Introduction) Section 2 (Achieving sustainable development) Section 5 (Delivering a sufficient supply of homes) Section 9 (Promoting sustainable transport) 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) 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 EM6 (water Quality) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM9 (Sustainable Water Use) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (The Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) St Mary Bourne Neighbourhood Plan Policy EP5 (Environmental Factors) Policy P7 (Design Requirements)

Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (2013) Policy 15: (Safeguarding Mineral Resources) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Heritage SPD (2019) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (2018) Design and Sustainability SPD (2018) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD (2018) Parking Standards SPD (2018) Policy SS6(e) Guidance Note St Mary Bourne and Stoke Conservation Area Appraisal. HCC Minerals and Waste safeguarding in Hampshire SPD (2016) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended 2015) Description of Site The application site is a field located to the northern side of Gangbridge Lane between Butlers Farm and Rowe Farmhouse. The ground level of the site rises to the north and the site is bounded by hedgerow to the west south and north with post and rail fencing to the eastern boundary with Butlers Farm. Access is from Gangbridge lane via an existing field gate in the south western corner of the site. To the north of the site is open countryside which rises, at a steeper gradient than the application site. There are no buildings or other structures within the field. The site area is 0.9 of a Hectare. Proposal This application seeks permission for the erection of a detached one and half storey dwelling with three bedrooms with associated landscaping, parking, and new access to Gangbridge lane. The proposed dwelling would be 13.4 Metres in width, 7.9 metres in depth and would have a pitched and side gabled roof to a maximum height of 5.8 metres. The dwelling would be orientated such that its front elevation would face north with parking located between the dwelling and the northern boundary. A new hedgerow is proposed to the eastern boundary and extensive tree planting is proposed to the western part of the site. Consultations Parish Council: No objection "It is noted that the application does not comply with the Neighbourhood Plan as it is:

Outside the settlement area

In a Conservation Area

Is a greenfield site but doesn't include affordable housing

Does not make use of redundant agricultural buildings. Biodiversity Team: No objection subject to condition. Landscape Team: Acceptable subject to condition. Historic Environment Team: Objection, "The proposed development would cause harm to the character and appearance of the St. Mary Bourne Conservation Area" HCC Highways: No objection subject to conditions. Tree Team: Acceptable, subject to condition. Environmental Health Team: Acceptable, subject to conditions. Environment Agency: No objection; recommend informative Public Observations Six letters have been received expressing support for the proposal, raising the

following:

This development is about as good as could be hoped for. It will impact very little on the character, traffic and visual appeal of the lane. It is small sacrifice to gain an additional dwelling in the parish.

We are fully in support of this application. It has been considerately and sensitively designed. It is friendly to us neighbours and fits in with the local environment. It sits well within the village Plan.

I fully support this application: the proposed site of the new house is well screened by the hedge in the lane and it will blend easily into the landscape. The proposed planting of trees will also enhance this part of Gangbridge Lane.

Relevant Planning History None for this field but the applications below relate to Butlers Farm (within the blue land) BDB/33048 Erection of detached annexe Refused

Appeal Dismissed

18.05.1992 18.01.1993

BDB/33047 Erection of detached annexe Refused

Appeal Dismissed

18.05.1992 18.01.1993

Assessment Principle of development Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must have regard to Section 36 (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. 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. - NPPF The NPPF constitutes guidance which the Local Planning Authority (LPA) must have regard to. Under the NPPF there is a need to consider whether the development is sustainable and to consider the social, environmental and economic impacts of the development. In considering new housing in rural areas Paragraph 78 advises that:

"To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.”

Paragraph 79 goes on to say that Local Planning Authorities should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. These instances include, essential rural workers dwellings, securing the optimal viable use of a heritage asset, re-use of redundant or disused building which would enhance its immediate setting, subdivision of an existing dwelling or would have a design that is of exceptional quality. In this instance, the proposals would not be considered isolated. Paragraph 11 of the NPPF states that where Local Plan Policies relevant to the determination of an application are considered to be out of date, then the presumption in favour of sustainable development should be applied. Criteria d) i) of Paragraph 11states that this presumption in favour of sustainable development should not be applied where development would lead to harm to assets of particular importance, such as designated heritage assets. - Local Plan The NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to identify a five year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. In addition, and in line with the Housing Delivery Test published in February 2019, a 20% buffer should be added to the borough's supply. 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 boroughs 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 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 only locations where this position would not apply is in parishes with recently made Neighbourhood Plans that allocate land for housing. The parishes with this extra protection are Whitchurch, until the end of September 2019, and Kingsclere until October 2020. 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 (paragraph 4.70) 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:

a) the site is on previously developed land; b) is part of a rural exception scheme; c) is for the re-use of an existing building; d) involves the replacement of an existing dwelling; e) is small scale to meet a locally agreed need; f) is required to support an existing rural business; g) or is allocated by a Neighbourhood Plan.

In respect of SS6a) it is noted that the site is not occupied by a permanent structure or building and as such is not compliant with the definition of Previously Developed Land (PDL) in the Glossary of the NPPF. As such the development site cannot be considered to be PDL and the application cannot be considered to be in accordance with criteria a) of Policy SS6. With regard to SS6 b), the proposal is not for a rural exception scheme. Criteria c) relates to proposals that propose the reuse of a redundant or disused building. In this case the proposal does not proposed the reuse of a redundant or disused building and therefore it is considered that the proposal would not meet this criteria.

Criteria d) relates to the erection of a replacement dwelling. This proposal would not replace an existing dwelling within the site and therefore it is considered that the proposal would not meet this criteria. Criteria e) relates to small scale (4 dwellings or less) proposals that meet a locally agreed need. No evidence of a locally agreed need has been submitted in support of this application. Policy SS6(e) further states that new housing outside Settlement Policy Boundaries will be only be permitted where they are: e) Small scale residential proposals of a scale and type that meet a locally agreed need provided that:

ix) it is well 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 tests in Policy SS6(e) are in two parts. The first part (e) sets out the overall limits of the exception whilst the second part (criteria ix - xi) then sets out detailed criteria for proposals that are within that exception. Therefore, a proposal that can satisfy the first part of criterion e) will fall within the exception as a matter of principle, but the specific details then need to be considered in terms of the criteria of the second part of the policy. A proposal which does not satisfy the exception will not be policy compliant even if it might otherwise comply with the detailed criteria ix - xi. In terms of the first part (e), the application is for one dwelling and therefore meets the test relating to scale (four dwellings or fewer) however proposals must also be of a scale and type that meets a locally agreed need. The Council has published a guidance note to assist in addressing locally agreed need. This advises that an applicant should demonstrate that their proposal meets a specific and clearly identified unmet need in the local area in terms of number, size, type, and tenure, and refers to the need being with the Parish, village, or settlement. The applicant has failed to provide information to support the application in respect of SS6(e) and there is no evidence to conclude that there is a locally agreed need for the accommodation proposed. As such it is the LPA's view that the applicant has failed to adequately demonstrate that the proposal would meet a locally agreed need in accordance with Policy SS6(e) of the Local Plan. With regard to criteria f) of SS6 the proposed dwelling is not linked to an existing and viable rural business and no evidence or assertions in this regard have been submitted by the applicant. With regard to criteria g) the site is not allocated within the St Mary Bourne Neighbourhood plan. As such the proposal does not meet this criteria.

The proposed development is therefore considered not to be in compliance with Policy SS6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. - St Mary Bourne Neighbourhood Plan

Policy P1 of the Neighbourhood Plan refers to reuse of redundant agricultural buildings. As no buildings exist on the site this Policy is not of relevance to this application. Policy P3 of the Neighbourhood plan refers to the mix of housing within developments and seeks a predominance of 2 and 3 bedroom units. While this is a proposal for a single dwelling it is noted that the dwelling would be a 3 bed unit. As such the proposal is in accordance with this Policy of the Neighbourhood Plan. Policy P4 of the Neighbourhood plan refers to rural exception sites which provide affordable Housing as defined by the NPPF. This proposal is not for affordable housing and as such is not of relevance to this proposal. Policy P5 of the Neighbourhood plan states that development proposals will be supported where they:

a) Respond positively to the local environment. b) Take account of and respect views into and out of sites. c) Demonstrate adequate sewer capacity. d) Ensure they preserve water quality. e) Facilitate home working do not significantly increase traffic flows. f) Are not built on areas vulnerable to flooding.

This policy is considered to relate to the environmental impacts of the development and are evaluated elsewhere within this report. In conclusion with regard to the principle of development and as noted above the council is unable to demonstrate a five year Housing Land Supply and as such Policy SS6 of the local plan and the policies of the Neighbourhood plan are afforded less weight in the assessment of applications for planning permission. As such the presumption in favour within the NPPF must be balanced against other material impacts. This assessment of material considerations is carried out in the report below and the balance of these considerations will be made in the Conclusions section. - Sustainable Development Paragraph 11 of the NPPF states that decisions should apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The three dimensions to achieving sustainable development are defined in the NPPF as: economic, social and environmental. The economic role of the NPPF requires proposals to contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy. The social role requires planning to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities and states that it should create a high quality built environment. The environmental role states that the natural built and

historic environment should be protected and enhanced and should mitigate and adapt to climate change. - Economic The proposed development would encourage development and associated economic growth through the actual physical building works. The future occupants would also undoubtedly contribute to the local economy and to the continued viability of local services in surrounding villages. However, as this would apply to an increase in a single dwelling only, any benefit to the local economy would be negligible. The economic role of the development is therefore considered to be limited. - Social The social aspect of sustainable development would be met through the contribution made to the housing stock. Therefore, although there would be a limited benefit as a result of the social role that this development would bring in terms of the provision of a single dwelling, this can only be afforded very limited weight as the contribution of a single dwelling in this regard is not considered to be significant. - Environmental With regard to the environmental role of this development, the development could reasonably be expected to demonstrate a degree of inherent sustainability through compliance with Council supported energy efficiency and Building Regulations standards. Given the location of the proposal relative to the built forms in the immediate it is not considered to be located within an isolated location and is considered to have reasonable access to the facilities and resources of St Mary Bourne. - Summary It is considered that the broad principle of the proposed development of a single dwelling on the site is acceptable given that the council is unable to demonstrate an 5 year Housing Land Supply and the limited weight that can therefore be afforded to Policy SS6 in assessing the application. However it is noted that Criteria d)i. of Paragraph 11 of the NPPF states that this presumption in favour of sustainable development must be balanced against harm to assets of particular importance, such as designated heritage assets. It is also noted that the NPPF at Paragraph 163 states that in areas at risk of flooding that safe access and escape routes are included in developments. As such the presumption in favour of sustainable development must also be balanced against the heritage, flooding and other material impact of the proposal. This assessment is undertaken below.

Impact on the character of the area/ design The site lies within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It is currently used as a field for agriculture and forms part of the owners land to the north and west of their existing home at Butlers Farm. A new vehicular access drive is proposed to service the new dwelling from Gangbridge Lane, which runs along the southern boundary. The proposal recognises that the southern part of the site lies within flood zone 3 and therefore proposes a porous drive and the introduction of an 'ecological' pond with bund feature, using spoil from the pond, with the main intention to alleviate any potential issues of flooding within the site as well as providing opportunities in terms of increasing visual amenity. Regarding the siting of the pond, the Landscape Officer advises that it may be advisable to allow a greater width between the fence boundary and the edge of the pond so as to maintain the option of a new hedge along the lane frontage, thereby strengthening the semi-rural character and containment of Gangbridge Lane. The new house would be positioned on higher ground beyond the flood plain. The plot is well contained by existing boundary vegetation consisting of mature trees and hedgerows. No buildings or trees are proposed for removal other than a small section of hedge along the street frontage to facilitate the new access. The proposal includes further planting of trees and hedges of indigenous species along the boundary between the field and existing gardens. A new orchard is also proposed to the north west of the new dwelling. The proposed new dwelling is to be set back from site boundaries and sited below the skyline with the building footprint parallel to the contours on an East to West alignment seeking to reflect the settlement pattern along Gangbridge Lane. In terms of is design and appearance, the proposed dwelling seeks to adopt the linear form and scale of a traditional local barn with plain clay roof tiles and walls of brick and flint. As such it is considered that the proposal would not lead to a Landscape harm or a detrimental impact upon the setting of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty due to the character of the proposed building, its location within the site and the associated planting. Impact upon Heritage Assets A local planning authority has specific obligations in respect of listed buildings. Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’) requires that ‘in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.’ The need for ‘special regard’ to be paid by the decision-maker is noted, as is the fact that such regard extends to the desirability of ‘preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest.’ Preserving has been defined as ‘doing no harm.’

The local planning authority also has specific obligations in respect of conservation areas. Section 72 of the 1990 Act states that in exercise of planning functions, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area ‘special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.’ The need for ‘special attention’ to be paid is noted. The phrases ‘special regard’ and ‘special attention’ are extremely important in relation to planning decisions affecting listed buildings, the setting of listed buildings, and conservation areas. Paragraph 190 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires local planning authorities to take the significance of any heritage asset into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise any conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal. It is important to understand the significance of any heritage assets that may be affected by a development proposal, prior to establishing, at an early stage, whether a development proposal harms or does not harm the significance of a heritage asset, and, further, whether any harm is ‘substantial’ or ‘less than substantial.’ Paragraph 193 of the NPPF notes that: ‘When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.’ Paragraph 196 of the NPPF states that where a development proposal will lead to harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset and such harm is ‘less than substantial’, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including, where appropriate, securing its optimal viable use. Decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate and by the Courts make it clear that ‘less than substantial harm’ is still harm, and that considerable importance and weight must be given to such harm in decision making. It is noted that benefits against which harm must be weighed must be public benefits, rather than benefits to an individual. Policy EM11 states that all development must conserve or enhance the quality of the borough’s heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance. Policy D7 states that all development proposals must achieve a high standard of design, which responds positively to the context and in the supporting text that full consideration should be given to protecting the conservation area and that ‘The conservation of the detailed pattern of fields, woodland, hedgerows and walls, and farm settlements and villages is essential to the preservation of local distinctiveness and identity’. Principle CA01 of the Heritage SPD any development should preserve or enhance aspects of a conservation area which make a positive contribution to its character and/or appearance, and should preserve the significance of the conservation area. Development should not prejudice the ability to appreciate that significance, and should, where possible, provide opportunities to aid such appreciation.

The application site is included within the Conservation Area boundary, but is not part of the densely developed village centre, which forms a distinct ribbon of development in the Valley bottom. The Conservation Area Appraisal is divided into five areas that characterise its unique qualities: the three areas of settlement (St Mary Bourne, Swampton, and Stoke); the river valley, which forms the most southerly part of the Conservation Area; and the middle section, lying between Swampton and Stoke. The application site is in Area 4 which is described as follows;

‘Area 4: Area between Stoke and Swampton The special interest of this sub-area is based on the divergence of two roads either side of the river valley, and the sporadic arrangement of small clusters of buildings here. This arrangement creates intimate short range views of the buildings along the verdant hedge-lined roads. The buildings also act as focal points for strategic long-range views across the low lying pasture. The character strongly reflects the traditional rural qualities and minimal development of this area.’

The Conservation Area appraisal states that ‘The single most important feature of the Conservation Area is the Bourne Rivulet and its topography. The river course, and its unique interrelationship with the buildings, and the spaces associated with it provides the essential character of the Conservation Area.’ Going on to say in the following paragraph; ‘Settlement in the area has developed along the meandering course of this water around fords, and latterly bridges. Where settlement has not taken place, large open spaces remain between the river and the lanes joining the village and hamlets. These low-lying spaces provide extensive views throughout the valley. They are a key part of the special interest of the Conservation Area, providing a distinctive pastoral setting to the rich survival of vernacular buildings. The steeply rising valley slopes, with open agricultural land and dense belts of trees, are integral in many views and serve to define the area.’ The fringes of the Conservation Area are characterised by isolated collections of buildings, in the form of small farmsteads, such as Butlers Farm (Grade II listed) and Rowe Farm (farmhouse is identified as being a notable building, which makes a positive contribution to the Conservation Area). Characteristic of this part of the Conservation Area are dispersed clusters of buildings which are set within spacious plots, or separated by significant stretches of undeveloped fields. This dispersal of built forms and the generous spacing between elements is considered to contribute to the distinctly rural and bucolic character and appearance and context of the Conservation Area as a whole. Butlers Farm is specifically mentioned in the Conservation Area appraisal. The appraisal states ‘The completeness of this historic farmyard grouping (all Grade II listed), in addition to their intimate arrangement, is of inherent historic and architectural value. Particularly notable are views into the courtyard from the south-east along Gangbridge Lane, and of the farm complex in its wider landscape setting from the B3048 to the north-west.’ The application site is the field to the north west of Butlers Farm Farmstead.

The application site is separated from the Bourne Rivulet, the single most important feature of the Conservation Area, by Gangbridge Lane. Development in this field would result in the intrusion of built form into this semi-rural location, eroding the largely undeveloped setting of the core of the village (which lies to the south east) causing harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area. The harm caused by a new dwelling in this location would be exacerbated by the inevitable accretion of domestic paraphernalia, such as washing lines and seating, which would fundamentally change the character of this field from an agricultural space, to an inherently more managed, domestic one. It is considered that the proposal would result in an erosion of the local pattern of built development and open space to the detriment of the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. As such the application is considered to be contrary to Policy EM11 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policies P5 and P7 of the Neighbourhood Plan, and the Heritage SPD. The proposed development would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of the Conservation Area and in accordance with paragraph 196 of the NPPF this harm needs to be weighed against the public benefit of the proposed development. There is no public benefit of the proposed development as this is an application for a private dwelling on a vacant field. Paragraph 193 of the NPPF is clear that great weight should be given to the heritage asset’s conservation ‘irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.’ The application is therefore considered to be contrary to chapter 16 of the NPPF, Policy EM11, Policy P7 and the Heritage SPD. As Noted previously Paragraph 11 d) i) of the NPPF states that there should be a presumption in favour of sustainable development unless this is in conflict with the other Policies of the NPPF. In this instance the proposed development is considered to be contrary to chapter 16 of the NPPF, as such the presumption in favour of sustainable development is not engaged in this instance. Biodiversity Further to Officer concerns regarding the absence of an ecological appraisal of the site a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal was submitted in support of this application in January 2019. Having reviewed this document the Biodiversity Officer is satisfied that there are no particular issues relating to key species or habitats on site other than those mitigation measures covered under Chapter 5.3 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. The biodiversity Officer also advises that there would be no impacts on the adjacent Bourne Rivulet resulting from the proposed development as construction of the house is well away from the watercourse. Furthermore the introduction of a wildlife pond, new hedges and fruit orchard present biodiversity enhancements. It is therefore considered that the proposed development is in accordance with the Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the NPPF (2019) and is acceptable in this regard.

Trees In the Tree Officer's initial response to this application additional information was requested with regard to the impact of the development upon the trees at the boundaries of the site. The applicant subsequently provided this information and the Tree Officers response to this information confirms that there is no arboricultural objection to the proposal and as such the development is considered to be acceptable in this regard. Flood Risk and Drainage The NPPF requires that new development should be either directed away from areas at highest risk or alternatively are demonstrated to be flood resilient and resistant. This applies a sequential approach, 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. The Environment Agency Flood Risk Maps position the southern part of the site as falling within Flood Zone 3 (which is the area at the highest risk of flooding), while the proposed dwelling is located in Flood zone 1 giving this part of the site a low risk of flooding (less than 1 in 1000 annual probability). The Environment Agency has reviewed the application with specific regard to flooding issues and has confirmed it has not objection to the proposal. It is acknowledged that the access and egress from the site and indeed Gangbridge lane is at higher risk of flooding and that that flooding of these areas would compromise the ability to make a safe escape from the site. Nonetheless the guidance given by the environment agency is unambiguous and is given with specific regard to flooding and as such it is considered that a reason for the refusal of the application on flood risk grounds would not be sustainable nor reasonable. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policies P5 and P7 of the Neighbourhood Plan and the NPPF. 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. It is considered that the proposed development would not have any adverse impact on the residential amenities of the occupiers of the surrounding neighbouring properties in terms of loss of light, overbearing or loss of privacy. Therefore the development is considered to be acceptable in this regard and to comply with Policy EM10 of the Local Plan, the Neighbourhood Plan, the design and sustainability SPD and the guidance contained within the NPPF.

Highways, Parking and Refuse The application site is in a ‘Rural’ location as defined by the Parking Standards SPD, wherein 3 vehicle parking spaces are required to service the proposed 3 bed dwelling. The proposed layout shows 2 parking spaces provided to service the dwelling. It is acknowledged that this is an under provision of 1 space, however it is also acknowledged that sufficient space remains within the plot to accommodate the parking and manoeuvring of 3 vehicles. As such, were all other aspects of the application acceptable, a condition that required the setting out, provision and maintenance of 3 spaces to serve the dwelling would be considered to be reasonable and necessary and would be imposed. No details of refuse storage or collection points are provided as part of this application and therefore, should all other matters have been acceptable then conditions securing such details prior to occupation would be considered reasonable and necessary. Environmental Health No potential on-site sources of contamination have been identified from records held or during a recent site walkover by an Environmental Health Officer. The proposed use of this site (residential) has been identified as being particularly vulnerable if land contamination were to be present. Should the recommendation in respect of this application been for approval, it is considered to be both reasonable and necessary to impose a conditions which requires that should any contaminants be found during the construction of development, works cease and the Local Authority be contacted. In terms of noise, it is considered reasonable to impose conditions to control noise during the construction of the development. These would have been included should all other matters in respect of the application have been found to be acceptable. As such it is considered that the proposal is in accordance Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. Ground Water Protection The site falls within a Source Protection Zone and as set out within Policy EM6 of the Local Plan, potentially contaminating development proposals will need to demonstrate that groundwater and surface water is adequately protected to prevent a deterioration of water quality and pollution of the water source. In this instance, the proposed residential end use of the site would not be considered to be a ‘contaminating form of development’ and as such it is not considered necessary in this instance to require further details in relation to groundwater/surface water. The contamination conditions as noted above, would have ensured, should all other matters have been found acceptable, that any existing contaminates are appropriately and safely removed from site, without harming the water source.

Community Infrastructure Requirements The Council's Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (2018), and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended 2015) are relevant with regard to planning obligations in the context of a development. The CIL regulations in particular now make it unlawful if the obligation sought does not meet the following three tests: (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms (b) directly related to the development, and; (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. The Council is mindful of the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) which was updated in May 2016 confirming that contributions for affordable housing and other 'tariff style' financial contributions should not be sought from small-scale residential developments of 10 units or less (5 units within designated (e.g. AONB) rural areas) and which have a maximum combined gross (internal) floor space of no more than 1,000m2. The use of the term 'and' (as opposed to 'or') within the PPG threshold implies that both unit number and floor space tests have to be met in order to justify seeking an affordable housing or tariff style financial contributions contribution. In this instance, the 5 unit trigger is not met and as such it is not necessary in accordance with ministerial guidance for tariff style contributions to be sought in relation to this development. Given that this application is for a single dwelling with no special circumstances, specific development related contributions are not required. 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, should the application be approved. Mineral Safeguarding The site is identified as being a Mineral Safeguarding Area. This relates to Policy 15 – ‘Safeguarding Mineral Resources’ of the Hampshire Mineral and Waste plan (2013) and the HCC Minerals and Waste Safeguarding in Hampshire SPD (2016). The aim of this policy is to safeguard mineral deposits. In this instance, however the application site area is below the threshold for HCC consultation. The purpose of this policy is to protect potentially economically viable mineral resource deposits from needless and unnecessary sterilisation. However, given the size of the proposed development, it is not considered viable for any extraction to take place. Hampshire County Council would encourage the use of any material that may be recovered through the construction phases of the development on site. 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 should all other matters have been found acceptable, this requirement could have been secured by way of condition. Conclusion The Borough Council cannot demonstrate a five year Housing Land Supply and as such Policy SS6 of the Local Plan is afforded less weight in the assessment of applications for planning permission. Paragraph 11 d) i) of the NPPF states that there should be a presumption in favour of sustainable development unless this is in conflict with the other Policies of the NPPF. The proposed development is considered to be contrary to chapter 16 of the NPPF and lead to harm to the character and appearance of the St Mary Bourne Conservation Area with no public benefit to weigh against the harm. As such the presumption in favour of sustainable development is not engaged in this instance. It is acknowledged that the proposal is not considered to lead to harms to landscape character or setting, biodiversity, trees, pollution or neighbouring amenity and the scale and design of the proposed dwelling is also considered to be acceptable. However these matters are not considered to outweigh the harm the development would have upon the character and appearance of the St Mary Bourne Conservation Area and as such this matter constitutes a reason for the refusal of the application. Informative(s):- 1. In accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework


- seeking further information following receipt of the application

In this instance:

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


App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Location plan

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Proposed Site Plan

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Proposed Floor Plans

Ground Floor

First Floor

App No.: 18/03459/FUL

Proposed Elevations


Item No. 5



Site Address Morrisons Worting Road Basingstoke RG21 8BJ

Proposal Siting of a prefabricated, single storey car store building

Registered: 23 April 2019 Expiry Date: 9 August 2019



Case Officer: Jemma Cox 01256 845304

Applicant: WM Morrisons Supermarkets PLC

Agent: Mrs Sarah Clark

Ward: Brookvale And Kings Furlong

Ward Member(s): Cllr Jack Cousens Cllr Michael Westbrook

Parish: OS Grid Reference: 462668 152002


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

relate in a sympathetic manner to the character of the area and make efficient use of land. As such it complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019), Policies EM10, EM11 and EP1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2018.

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

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

3 The proposed development would not require on-street parking or waiting/

manoeuvring on the adjacent highway and adequate parking would be available to customers. As such, the proposal would not cause detrimental impacts to highway safety and would accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

General Comments The application is brought to the Development Control Committee at the request of Councillor Westbrook for the following reason:


"Given the context of the site, in particular the off-shoot nature of this section of car parking, I believe that cumulatively, these changes will adversely alter the overall commercial character of the site. Furthermore, although the changes would be subservient to the main supermarket they would not maintain a close relationship in terms of their use. I would therefore request that should Officers be minded to recommend this application for approval that it be referred to the Development Control committee for determination." Planning Policy The site is located within the Basingstoke Settlement Boundary Policy. The site also lies within the 'locally' defined Basingstoke Upstream Critical Drainage Area (UCDA) and Groundwater Protection Zone 1 as defined on the Adopted Local Plan Policies Map and within Flood Zone 1 (in having a low probability of fluvial flooding). The site is also situated adjacent to Brookvale West Conservation Area. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (February 2019) Section 2 (Achieving Sustainable Development Section 6 (Building a strong, competitive economy) Section 8 (Promoting healthy and safe communities) 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) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy CN9 (Transport) Policy EM1 (Landscape) Policy EM6 (Water Quality) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) Policy EM11 (The Historic Environment) Policy EM12 (Pollution) Policy EP1 (Economic Growth and Investment) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2018, Section 8 - High quality buildings and Section 9 - Materials and detailing Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Planning Obligations for Infrastructure SPD (March 2018) Brookvale West Conservation Area Appraisal (2003) Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018)

Heritage SPD 2018 Description of Site The site is located within the existing car park serving Morrison's Supermarket and currently consists of 14 parking spaces within the wider parking area for the store. Extensive landscaping is to the north of the spaces. Proposal The application seeks planning permission for the erection of an aluminium, prefabricated, single storey 'pod' which is rectangular in shape. Overall the structure measures 7.9m in width and 3.9m in depth and 3.4m in height with a flat roof. The structure is to be occupied by 'Car Store', offering car valuation, sale and collection services. It is proposed to operate during the same opening hours as Morrisons (07:00-23:00 Mon-Sat and 10:00-14:00 Sun). ‘Car Store’ are a national, online second hand car sales business that are supported by stores throughout the country. In general the business model is operated by bringing cars to the purchaser through delivery and collection to the customers local ‘Car Store’. The submitted drawings illustrate that the exterior of the structure would be dark blue with a lighter blue canopy arch over the entrance. Whilst corporate signage is indicated on the submitted drawings, this would require a separate application for Advertisement Consent. An informative is recommended to remind the Applicant in this respect. The proposed development would be sited within the north-eastern corner of the existing superstore car park and would result in the loss of 14 parking spaces, which includes the provision of an identified number of spaces (10.no) for customer parking and collections. Amended Plans Amended plans were received which extended the red line of the application site to incorporate an identified number of bays for the purposes of customer collections and customer parking. A further 10 parking spaces have been specified for this purpose. In addition, the amended site plan reflects the parking spaces lost as a result of previous planning permissions at the site.

Consultations Cllr Westbrook: "As with other recent applications by Morrisons to site new prefabricated buildings and businesses at this location, I strongly object to this further application here. There are, as I have previously pointed out to Morrisons, other suitable, more industrial locations within their car park. Other locations that won't impact on my residents or Morrisons customers and which wouldn't be detrimental to our residents quality of life. This application is for the siting of a 'Car Store' building within the car park of Morrisons Store in my ward of Brookvale & Kings Furlong. The area of the car park chosen, sits adjacent to King George V Playing Fields and close to residential properties within the Conservation Area. The Car Store, according to the Planning Assessment provided as part of the application, will offer walk in and advanced appointments to customers seeking car valuations, sales, trade and collection services. The Planning Assessment document under 5.7 notes that 'the notional loss of four car parking spaces is immaterial as it would not adversely impact the function or availability of spaces for Morrisons only customers'. I believe the application will have an impact as it sits in very close proximity to the main area of accessible parking spaces provided by Morrisons for their customers who would be impeded by this decision. As for the impact on parking availability, the siting of the prefabricated unit itself will take up 4 spaces, there is no mention of parking for the four members of staff running the operation, nor spaces that will be taken up by vehicles sold and awaiting collection, and, as the Car Store service includes fulfilling requests for cars to be transferred for viewing, those cars will also require spaces. I would argue that the cumulative effect of recent applications must be taken into account as in addition to these lost spaces;

2 spaces have already been lost following the recent planning approval no. 18/02348/FUL - Aug 2018 for a prefabricated unit to form a Nail & Beauty Pod, plus additional cars for customers of the Nail Bar.

Another 6 spaces were lost following approval of retrospective application no. 18/01798/RET - June 2018 for the erection of an enclosed steel canopy with plastic glazing to sides and roof to form a greenhouse style unit adjacent to the supermarket entrance which removed and pushed accessible spaces further away from the main store entrance for those with disabilities.

Application no. 19/00744/FUL for a car park valeting franchise is awaiting decision by the Development Control Committee which if approved would mean the loss of a further 9 spaces. This number will rise whilst cars and

customers wait to be served

Given the context of the site, in particular the off-shoot nature of this section of car parking, I believe that cumulatively, these changes will adversely alter the overall commercial character of the site. Furthermore, although the changes would be subservient to the main supermarket they would not maintain a close relationship in terms of their use. I would therefore request that should Officers be minded to recommend this application for approval that it be referred to the Development Control committee for determination." Public Observations One letter of objection was received raising the following concerns (summarised):

Spaces have already been lost through the granting of previous applications and the cumulative impact will lead to customers parking on nearby residential roads

Proposed site would adversely impact and disturb neighbouring dwellings

The development would adversely impact the enjoyment of the adjacent park Relevant Planning History BDB/36906 Redevelopment of site to provide retail

storey petrol filling station car parking and associated highway works

Approved 07/12/94

BDB/75931 Variation of Condition 13 of BDB/36906 to amend restriction relating to delivery times to allow deliveries from 0500 hours

Refused 17/05/12

15/03285/ROC Variation of condition 13(b) of BDB/36906 to allow delivery times from 5am to 11pm Mon - Sat and 6.30am to 11pm on Sun

Refused 14/12/15

16/03337/FUL Erection of side extension to an existing PFS Kiosk to provide additional retail space and 2 no. additional parking bays

Approved 21/11/16

16/04075/FUL Change of use parking spaces to hand car wash with cabin, floodlighting and associated works

Withdrawn 06/04/17

17/03262/ADV Display of various illuminated and non-illuminated signs

Approved 23/11/17

18/01247/FUL Installation of canopy and Portakabin within area of existing car park to create car park valeting franchise

Withdrawn 10/07/18

18/01248/ADV Display of various non-illuminated signs to

external cabin elevations, perimeter fence and canopy fascias.

Withdrawn 10/07/18

18/01798/RET Erection of enclosed steel canopy with plastic glazing to sides and roof to form greenhouse style unit, adjacent to the supermarket entrance (Retrospective)

Approved 02/08/18

18/01799/ADV Display of 4 no. non-illuminated vinyl banner signs

Approved 03/08/18

18/02323/ADV Display of non-illuminated signs for car park valeting franchise

Approved 07/02/19

18/02348/FUL Siting of single storey prefabricated unit to form nail and beauty pod

Approved 17/12/18

18/02322/FUL Proposed installation of canopy and portakabin within area of existing car park to create car park valeting franchise

Refused 08/02/19

19/00744/FUL Proposed installation of canopy and portakabin within area of existing car park to create car park valeting franchise

Approved 21/05/19

19/01166/ROC Variation of Condition 13(b) of BDB/36906 to extend the delivery hours to allow Morrisons to receive deliveries from 0500 to 2300 hours Monday to Saturday and 0630 to 2300 hours on Sundays

Pending

Assessment Planning History Recently there have been several applications for planning permission which have resulted in the loss of customer parking spaces (shown in bold in the list above). Car Wash - 19/00744/FUL An application for a car valeting franchise was approved in May 2019 which results in the loss of 9no. customer parking spaces. Beauty Pod - 18/02348/FUL An application for a beauty pod was approved in December 2018 which resulted in the loss of 2no. parking spaces.

Greenhouse -18/01798/RET A retrospective application was approved in August 2018 granting permission for a steel canopy 'greenhouse' of the selling plants at the site. The approved structure displaced 4no. accessible parking spaces to elsewhere in the car park. A total of 6.no regular parking spaces were lost as a result. At the time of Officer site visit, the car wash and beauty pod permissions had not been implemented. However, these decisions are considered to be a material consideration in the determination of this application in consideration of the cumulative impact of development on available customer parking. Overall, recent permissions have resulted in the loss of 17no. customer parking spaces (no loss of accessible or parent and child spaces). This application, should it be approved, would result in the loss of a further 14.no car parking spaces. The cumulative impact of the loss of 31no. car parking spaces on the available parking at the site is discussed in the Highways and Parking section of this report. Principle of Development Section 12 of the NPPF asserts that planning decisions should ensure that developments will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, be visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping, are sympathetic to the local character and history as well as establishing or maintaining a strong sense of place and creating places. Developments should also ensure the creation of places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. Policy CN9 sets out that development should provide appropriate on-site parking and should not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safety. 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 EM6 states that the council will protect, manage and improve the water quality of the boroughs water environment and new development should incorporate sustainable drainage systems. Policy EM7 establishes that development will only be acceptable within area of flood risk from any source of flooding if it is clearly demonstrated that it is appropriate at that location. 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 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. Policy EP1 supports the creation of 8100-12600 jobs throughout the plan period. It is considered that the principle of the proposed development meets the criteria set out within Policies CN9, EM1, EM6, EM7, EM10, EM12 and EP1 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 The proposed 'pod' would be located some 25m north of the existing supermarket building, situated within the existing car park. The structure would sit immediately adjacent the recently approved 'Car Valeting' facility and in close proximity to the recently approved 'Beauty Pod'. At the time of the officer site visit the extant permissions for the car washing facility and beauty pod had not been implemented. As such, consideration has been given to the impact on the surrounding area in relation to the proposal in isolation as well as part of a small cluster of commercial units, should the extant permissions be implemented at a later date. Given the context of the site it is considered that the unit would not adversely alter the overall commercial character of the site. The proposed car store building would be read in conjunction with the existing and extant businesses within and around the site and would not appear out of place. Furthermore, due to its scale, the structure would be subservient to the main supermarket. Although it is acknowledged that following the implementation of extant permissions at the site, there would be additional built form in this corner of the car park it is not considered that this would materially alter the character of the site and cumulatively, development would be of a scale that is subservient to the main supermarket use. The screening afforded by surrounding trees and vegetation would obscure the proposed structure from the neighbouring residential areas and playing area sited to the north of the site. As such, the proposal would not be visually intrusive in the context of the wider area. This would also be the case following the implementation of the extant permissions (Beauty Pod and Car Wash). It is considered that the overall character of the adjoining Conservation Area would be preserved given the substantial screening and presence of existing commercial (and recently approved) development. The application site includes an identified area (comprising of 10no. parking spaces) for customer parking and also the cars awaiting collection following purchase. Given the proposed business model in which the proposal would seek to complement on-line sales, the site would not be taken up with cars being advertised for sale. Therefore, the visual appearance of this aspect of the proposal would remain as per the existing situation, which comprises of car parking. In order to protect the visual

amenity of the site and to prevent the presence of commercial activity overspilling across the existing car park, it is considered reasonable to condition that no signage be erected on or around this area. In addition, a condition restricting the right to erect any form of external lighting is recommended in order to protect the visual amenity of the site. The proposed facility is of a scale that would not adversely alter the character of the surrounding area and would not appear out of place. It is therefore considered that, subject to suitable conditions, the proposal is acceptable in terms of design and impact on character of the area, including adjacent Conservation Area and in accordance with Policy EM10 and EM11 of the Local Plan. Impact on neighbouring amenities The location of the car store building would be over 55m from the nearest residential properties (to the east). Dense vegetation separates the proposed location from the adjacent playing fields located to the north of the site. Given the overall separation distances, scale and nature of the development, it is considered that the proposal would not significantly detract from the amenities of adjoining neighbours by virtue of overlooking or overshadowing. The unit would operate on a retail basis, offering customers the sale of cars in addition to valuation services and a collection point for purchased vehicles. On this basis, and in combination with the overall separation distance between the siting of the proposed unit and the nearest residential properties, it is considered that the noise and disturbance from the proposed development in this location would have a low likelihood of adverse impact upon the closest dwellings. Whilst no comments have been received from the Environmental Health Officer in relation to this application, it is noted that no objections were raised in relation to the recently approved Beauty Pod and Car Valeting Facility, which are both sited within close proximity to the nearest residential dwellings. It is also considered that the previously approved car-washing facility would have a more notable impact than the proposed car store building. As such, it considered that a refusal on the basis of impact to neighbouring amenity would not be justified. Notwithstanding this, it is considered reasonable to attach conditions regarding the operating hours of the proposed facility in order to prevent unnecessary disturbance to nearby neighbours when the main store is closed. The submitted application form states that intended operation hours would be 07:00-23:00 hrs Monday-Saturday and 10:00-16:00 hrs on Sundays and Bank Holidays which is in line with the opening hours of the main supermarket and the extant permission for the ‘Beauty Pod’. Whilst these hours would permit activity for a longer period that the adjoining car washing facility, the car wash has the potential to notably impact on the amenities of adjoining neighbours outside of the permitted hours than the proposal. As such, these hours of use are considered acceptable and have been conditioned to this effect.

Exterior lighting does not form part of this application. As such, there are no concerns in relation to light pollution and the disturbance of neighbouring dwellings. However, given the proximity of nearby neighbours, it is considered necessary to remove the rights to erect any form of lighting that may cause undue disturbance to neighbouring properties throughout the night. With regards to the existing businesses within proximity of the site, it is considered that the 'car store' building would not cause adverse harm to these businesses. The proposal is considered to be complementary to the other existing and extant businesses within the site and would not give rise to detrimental adverse harm. Overall, the proposed car valeting facility would not detract from the amenities of adjoining neighbours and is therefore considered acceptable in this respect. Highway and Parking Impacts The existing commercial development at the site was permitted under reference BDB/36906 in December 1994 subject to a number of conditions. Whilst none of these conditions specify a precise number of spaces to be retained in association with the retail use of the site, Condition 19 requires that parking spaces be retained as such. The current application is the appropriate mechanism for addressing this condition. The proposals would result in the loss of a total of 14no. existing parking spaces currently available for Morrison's customers. The proposed unit would be directly sited on 4no. exiting spaces. A revised site plan was submitted which identifies the loss of a further 10.no spaces for customer parking and collections. As identified above, this application alongside other planning permissions would result in cumulative loss of 31no. spaces (in combination with recent, previous approvals). In accordance with the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018), Food Retail uses situated within the 'Inner Urban' should provide for 1 parking space per 18m² of covered areas. The overall superstore comprises of approximately 6963.4m² of covered area, which would therefore require a minimum of 387 spaces to be provided on site. Taking into account the cumulative loss of 31no. spaces as a result of the current and previous approvals, the site would continue to provide a total of 495no. parking spaces, which is in excess of the required 387 spaces by 107. It is acknowledged that the loss of parking spaces would have a negative impact in comparison with the existing situation. However it is considered that the loss of these spaces and the daily operation of the 'car store' would not have a significantly detrimental impact on the overall provision of customer car parking. The overall level of parking retained at the site would still accord with the non-residential parking standards and Policy CN9 of the Local Plan. The Agent has advised that the proposed 'car store' building will be a complementary and ancillary service to the existing Supermarket and it is envisioned that the majority of customers would get a valuation on their vehicles, whilst shopping at the

main supermarket. As such, it is expected that the majority of customer parking would be absorbed within the existing supermarket car park. It has also been advised that car collections will be made within 72 hours of delivery. The identified 10 existing parking spaces is considered adequate to accommodate cars awaiting collection and those visiting customers that do not wish to utilise the other services at the site. Given the overprovision of retained parking spaces, this model is not considered to materially impact on customer parking to warrant refusal of the application. It is acknowledged that the siting of the proposed 'car store' building would be within relatively close proximity to accessible parking spaces. However, it is considered that the operation of the facility would not adversely impact on the accessibility or provision of these spaces. The non-residential parking standards stipulate that a minimum of 5% of spaces should be designated for accessible use. These spaces should be clearly marked out and should be located close to the entrance. As explained above, in applying the current non-residential parking standards, a superstore of this size in this location should provide for at least 387 parking spaces, of which 20 should be allocated for use by disabled people (when applying the 5% threshold). The proposed site plan submitted within the application illustrates that the existing car park currently provides 26 accessible parking spaces, exceeding the number as per the non-residential parking standards. Moreover, the siting of the proposed unit, within close proximity to accessible spaces would allow for these users to also conveniently use the facility. The proposed car store building would utilise the supermarkets existing access. Whilst the proposed development has the potential to increase vehicle movements to and from the site, given the current use, operating times and the scale of the existing carriageway it is not considered the proposed development would result in a material change to the highway. As such the proposal is acceptable in terms of traffic generation and the site is sufficient in size to accommodate visiting trade. There is no requirement for on-street parking or waiting/ manoeuvring on the adjacent highway and adequate parking is available to customers. Therefore the proposal would not give rise to detrimental impacts to highway safety and is considered acceptable in this respect. Given the overprovision of parking at the site, it is considered that the development would not result in an overspill of parking onto adjacent highways. Overall, the proposal would not cause detrimental impacts to highway safety and would accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019), Policies CN9 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. Trees The siting of the proposed 'car-store' building would be within the existing car park, which is laid to hardstanding. As such, the siting of the unit is not considered to represent detrimental harm to the adjoining trees/vegetation over and above that of the existing situation.

On this basis, the proposed development is not considered to adversely impact on adjoining trees and the visual amenity of the area would be maintained. Therefore the proposal would comply with Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. Water Quality, Drainage and Flood Risk Policy EM7 'Managing flood risk' of the Local Plan sets out the Council's approach to considering flood risk. This requires applications to be supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) for sites within local defined critical drainage areas and upstream critical drainage areas. Footnote 26 of this policy states that "these CDAs are not CDAs 'as notified to the LPA by the Environment Agency' as defined in the NPPF". Whilst the nature/level of detail contained within any FRA will depend upon the scale and type of the proposal, the accompanying text to Policy EM7 acknowledges that developments located in Flood Zone 1 would not normally require an FRA. However, exceptions are recommended for those locations where a new development is likely to overload the capacity of the existing drainage system. It is not considered that the scale of the development or the overall demand placed upon the drainage system would trigger the need for a Flood Risk Assessment and given its small scale is unlikely to overload the capacity of the existing drainage system. The site lies within the 'locally' defined Basingstoke Groundwater Protection Zone as defined on the Local Plan Policies Map. Policy EM6 sets out the Council's approach to considering water quality. It is considered that given the site surroundings and existing use, the site has a low environmental risk. It is not considered that the proposal would be a potentially contaminating development and therefore no further information has been requested. Therefore, the development would not result in undue harm to the Water Environment and as such the proposal would comply with National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and Policies EM6 and EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. 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, and noting the nature of the proposal, the development is CIL liable, but zero rateable. Economic Development The proposed car store business would employ 3 full time equivalent posts and 1 part time employee, which whilst of a limited scale would bring employment and

economic activity to the site which is currently car parking. The generation of economic activity and employment at the site is considered to be a benefit of the scheme which is considered together with other relevant material considerations, and is encouraged through the NPPF (2019) and Local Plan Policy EP1. Conclusion The siting of the proposed 'car store' building is considered to be acceptable and would not result in any significant adverse impacts to the existing on site business, character of the area, neighbouring amenity or result in an increased traffic movements/risk of flooding. The proposal is economic development that would create some limited employment opportunity without leading to any detrimental impacts in terms of the relevant material considerations. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with Policies EP1, EM1, EM6, EM7, EM10, EM11, EM12 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the


345_PL_01 Rev C - Site Location Plan (dated March 2019) 345_PL_02 Rev C - Proposed Site Plan (dated March 2019) 000/10E - Floor Plans and Elevations (dated July 2018)


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 Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

4 The car store and sales facility shall not operate before 07:00 hours or remain

in operation after 23:00 hours Monday to Saturday or before 10:00 hours or after 16:00 hours on Sundays or on any recognised public/bank holiday. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029

5 Whether or not development no external lighting on or around the parking

spaces identified for customer parking and collections, as shown on the proposed site plan, shall be installed.

REASON: In order to protect the amenities of adjoining neighbours and the visual appearance of the area in accordance with Polices EM10 and EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and in the interest of the visual amenity of the site in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.

6 Whether or not development no adverts or signage shall be placed in, on or

around the parking spaces (or vehicles using them) identified for customer parking and collections, as shown on the proposed site plan. REASON: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and to prevent the expansion of the presence of commercial activity across the site.




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.



- considering the imposition of conditions

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


3. The applicant is reminded that this approval does not give any indication of any

consent necessary under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 which may or may not be required nor any indication that such consent will be forthcoming. The applicant is advised to contact the Planning and Development Manager in this regard.

App No.: 19/00979/FUL

Location plan

Proposed Site Plan

App No.: 19/00979/FUL

Proposed Elevations

Proposed Floor Plan


Item No. 6

Application no: 19/01193/RET


Site Address 220 Kempshott Lane Basingstoke Hampshire RG22 5LR

Proposal Construction of patio (retrospective)

Registered: 8 May 2019 Expiry Date: 9 August 2019


Retention of Development (Section 73A)

Case Officer: Meredith Baker 01256 845444

Applicant: Mr C Sawyer Agent:

Ward: Kempshott Ward Member(s): Cllr Anne Court Cllr Hayley Eachus Cllr Tony Capon

Parish: OS Grid Reference: 460132 150176


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

relate in a sympathetic manner to the street scene and character of the area and as such complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019), Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Section 11 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018).

2. The proposed development, with conditions, would not result in an undue loss

of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to the occupiers of neighbouring properties and as such complies with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Sections 10 and 11 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (July 2018).

General comments This application has been brought before the Development Control Committee at the request of Councillor Tony Capon for the following reason: "... Just to confirm that I would indeed like this to please be called in to DC committee in August, I have significant concerns regarding the impact on privacy for surrounding residents by this development including concerns regarding the sustainability regarding the mitigation methods proposed to aid privacy issues."

http://planning.basingstoke.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=PQRW62CR0AP00

Planning Policy The application site lies within the Basingstoke Town Settlement Policy Boundary. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (February 2019) Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places) Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 Policy SD1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy EM6 (Water Quality) Policy EM7 (Managing Flood Risk) Policy EM10 (Delivering High Quality Development) 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 SPD (March 2018) Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) Description of Site The application site consists of a two storey residential dwellinghouse sited within a generous plot along the residential road of Kempshott Lane. The dwelling is set back from the highway by an area laid to hardstanding for vehicular parking and the rear garden decreases in levels to the west (from the rear of the house to the end of the garden). Proposal The proposal seeks retrospective planning permission for the construction of a patio/raised platform to the rear of the existing dwelling of rendered brickwork (to match the dwelling) and black sandstone paving slabs. The development projects 4.88 metres beyond the rear elevation of the existing dwelling and lies flush in width to the dwelling. The patio has a maximum height of 0.96 metres with post and rail fencing on top. It is proposed that additional screening would be erected on the northern and southern elevations of the patio which would be 1.8 metre peeled reed natural fencing, giving an overall height of 2.76 metres. Amendments During the course of the application the additional screening to the northern and southern elevation was negotiated as a result of the concerns from the Case Officer

and the public. A revised plan was also submitted rectifying the incorrect references to north and south views. Consultations Councillor T Capon: " Thank you for your time last week in discussing the below case - unfortunately I am having difficulties completing the word document form you kindly sent over, however just to confirm that I would indeed like this to please be called in to DC committee in August, I have significant concerns regarding the impact on privacy for surrounding residents by this development including concerns regarding the sustainability regarding the mitigation methods proposed to aid privacy issues." Highways: Standing Advice. Public Observations Three letters of objection were received raising concerns as follows (in summary):

- Disruption (loss of light and overshadowing) to 216 Kempshott Lane already present due to previously granted extension (planning reference 17/00945/HSE).

- Further enforcement issues with regards to incorrect materials use to implement planning reference 17/00945/HSE and laying of gravel on the substation access outside the red line.

- Precedent for refusal of patio already place due to planning reference 16/01336/FUL (for the erection of 216 Kempshott Lane) whereby the terraced area had to be reduced in size and height due to the impact to the property to 214 Kempshott Lane.

- Loss of privacy and overlooking to neighbouring dwellings. - Screening would result in additional loss of light to 216 Kempshott Lane. - Reduction of the overall height and size of the terraced area is required to

ensure no view of patio and rear openings of 216 Kempshott Lane. - No elevation drawing submitted showing the height of the terrace. - Question if the fence around the patio complies with building safety

regulations. - Request for screening to reduce overlooking to neighbours.

Relevant Planning History 17/00945/HSE Erection of two storey side extension, single

storey rear extension and alterations to front porch

Granted 09.06.2017

This is referenced to as the ‘extension application’ within this report.

Assessment Principle of development 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. The policy also requires developments to provide high levels of amenity for proposed occupants and neighbouring occupiers regarding privacy, amenity space and natural light. It is considered that the principle of the proposed development meets the criteria set out within the above policy of the Local Plan and is therefore acceptable subject to other material planning considerations being considered, as considered further below. Impact on the character of the area/ design The immediate area is characterised by residential dwellings of various designs and construction. The development whilst to the rear of the dwelling would be afforded glimpsed views from the public highway of Kempshott Lane given the intervening gap between the host dwelling and 222 Kempshott Lane to the south. It is noted however that as a result of the substation and existing boundary treatment any views would be minimal from this public highway. It is also notable that views may be afforded from Kestrel Road to the west through the first floor gaps as a result of the level differences whereby dwellings along Kempshott Lane are situated at a higher level. Whilst these glimpsed views are noted, by virtue of the size and design the raised platform and screening would not give rise to any significantly adverse impacts upon the character of the area or street scene. It is considered that given the size, design and siting of the patio, it would not dominate or compete with the character of the host dwelling. Although it is considered that the patio is large in its dimensions, given the generous sizing of the plot with the levels decreasing towards the west, the patio would not be of demonstrable harm to the existing character of the application site. With regards to the proposed materials, the patio is proposed to have rendered sides to match the existing dwelling which will help retain its existing character. In regard to screening, given that only very minimal views would be afforded from the public realm, this principle of screening would not give rise to any demonstrable harm as to warrant the refusal of planning permission. As such it is considered that on balance, given the design and siting, the proposal would be acceptable in its design and accords with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 -2029. Impact on neighbouring amenities The patio / raised platform given its siting and size would give rise to additional impacts upon the neighbouring amenities to the north, south and west. These impacts will be evaluated in relation to the following; what would have occurred due

to the extension application; overbearing / loss of outlook / overshadowing and loss of light and; overlooking / loss of privacy.

Southern neighbouring dwellings The extension application had two patio door openings on the rear elevation that opened onto the rear garden. As demonstrated on the submitted elevation plan (Drawing No. 109/102 Rev A) the immediate area outside the rear doors would have a ground level similar to the host dwelling and would decrease in levels towards the west. When considering the site, irrespective of the patio / raised platform, the levels as approved under the extension site would have provided overlooking towards the southern dwellings over the subsequent boundary treatment as a result of the differences in levels. It is also noted that 222 Kempshott Lane has an existing raised platform which would have been visible from the approved levels under the extension application given it sits above the boundary fencing. This structure does not appear to have benefited from planning permission, however it was insitu when the extension application was being considered and the relationship was considered acceptable. By virtue of its height and northern siting which is in excess of 5 metres from the boundary towards 222 Kempshott Lane, the development is considered not give rise to any adverse overbearing effect, loss of outlook, overshadowing or loss of light to any dwellings to the south. It is notable that the patio would give rise to additional overlooking and loss of privacy to the southern dwellings, and in particular the neighbouring 222 Kempshott Lane. It is proposed that 1.8 metre screening would be erected on the southern elevation of the patio, however it is noted that views would still be afforded from the steps to the south (which would not be screened) as well as oblique views towards the rear garden from the unscreened views from the western elevation. With regard to the views from the western elevation, the oblique views towards the garden of 222 Kempshott Lane are considered to be similar to that experienced by the openings of the existing host dwelling, in particular at first floor level. As such this outlook from the western elevation would not be generate any significantly adverse overlooking or loss of privacy to warrant refusal of planning permission. As noted, the outlook from the steps to the south would allow direct views towards 222 Kempshott Lane’s raised patio/platform which is visible over the boundary fence. This overlooking has been considered and it is noted that the approved situation as a result of the extension application, allows similar views when accessing the patio doors from the rear / side garden areas. Therefore on balance the view from the steps are not considered to be of significant detrimental harm above that was previously approved, as to warrant refusal of planning permission. This assessment also takes into account the remaining area of the southern elevation would be screened to prevent adverse overlooking and loss of privacy for the main social area.

Northern neighbouring dwellings As stated above the extension application had two patio door openings on the rear elevation that opened onto the rear garden. As demonstrated on the submitted elevation plan (Drawing No. 109/102 Rev A) the immediate area outside the rear doors would have a ground level similar to the host dwelling and would decrease in levels towards the west. As such the approved levels under the extension application would have given rise to activity outside the patio doors and close to the approved structure nd this was found to be acceptable. As a result of the extension application and the raised platform with screening (which would have a maximum height of 2.76 metres) the development would give rise to additional impacts towards the amenities of 216 Kempshott Lane given its close proximity to the boundary. The host dwelling is already sited further west than 216 Kempshott Lane and therefore the existing dwelling (at two storey and single storey height) is sited against the rear patio area of this neighbouring dwelling. As stipulated within the Design and Sustainability SPD (Section 10) the main private areas that need to be assessed in relation to amenity are habitable rooms (living rooms, dining rooms, bedrooms) kitchens and patio areas in gardens immediately adjoining the building. The principle of 1.8 metre screening does not generate any significantly adverse loss of outlook given the single storey nature of the development and siting. The cumulative effect of the existing dwelling and screening would result in a large development alongside the boundary of 216 Kempshott Lane, which would generate a level of overbearing effect and subsequent impact. Whilst this is noted, as a result of the single storey nature, siting away from the boundary and noting the existing situation, the screening would not give rise to any detrimental overbearing effect sufficient to justify the refusal of planning permission. Consideration has also been made to what could have been previously constructed under permitted development. Prior to the extension application, a single storey garage was sited in proximity to the boundary which appears to be original in its nature (although this was a flat roof prior to planning reference BDB/34508). Under permitted development rights an extension of 4 metres to the rear could be constructed (as a detached dwelling) with a height of 4 metres and an eaves height of 3 metres (given it would be within 2 metres of the boundary of the curtilage of the dwellinghouse). Under the prior approval scheme for large home extensions the dwelling could have potentially had an 8 metre rear extension of the same heights. When considering this against the current situation, a four metre extension would have been present up to the first post on the existing patio and an 8 metre extension would be approximately 1.3 metres beyond the patio/raised platform. Therefore noting what could have occurred under permitted development whereby the eaves height could have been 3 metres and subsequently higher than the current maximum height of 2.76 metres of the screening, the impact is not considered on balance so significantly as to be detrimental beyond what could have occurred under permitted development / prior approval. It is notable that given the orientation of the dwellings, that the screening would give rise to additional overshadowing to 216 Kempshott Lane within the midday and early

afternoon hours. Whilst this is noted, given the single storey nature and siting, as well as noting that it would only impact the main patio area at a very minimal part of the day, any overshadowing or loss of light is not considered to be of demonstrable harm that would warrant the refusal of the application. By virtue of the 1.8 metre screening that would be located on the northern elevation of the patio, it is considered that there would be no adverse overlooking towards the neighbouring properties to the north. Some oblique views would be afforded from the unscreened western elevation to the rear garden of 216 Kempshott Lane in particular, however as assessed above in relation to the 222 Kempshott Lane the oblique views would be similar to that experienced by the openings of the existing dwelling, and therefore would not be of detrimental harm to the amenities of 216 Kempshott Lane.

Western neighbouring dwellings The approved extension application showed levels that came in line with the host dwelling which slightly decreased in levels to the west. The views from the extension application would therefore be similar to that of patio towards the dwelling, however given the 4.88 metre depth there would be additional impacts in terms of overlooking than that previously approved. By virtue of the distance in excess of 23 metres from the boundary towards 47 Kestrel Road, the development is considered not give rise to any adverse overbearing effect, loss of outlook, overshadowing or loss of light to any dwellings to the west. It is notable that the patio/ raised platform would be located closer towards the western boundary than the dwellinghouse and would give rise to additional views towards the rear gardens of the dwellings along Kestrel Road, in particular 47 Kestrel Road. This has been considered and given the existing level differences at the site and 23.5 metre distance from the boundary between these sites, it would not be considered that this structure would generate undue overlooking or loss of privacy as to justify the refusal of planning permission. It is also considered that the views would be similar to that of the openings on the dwelling, in particular the first floor windows. When considering the Design and Sustainability SPD for privacy and overlooking (Section 11.11) it states that for windows ‘to the rear of a property it is normal practice to require a minimum distance of 20 metres between directly facing windows, where one is at first floor level.’ For 3 storey developments (Section 10.11) it states that a minimum distance back to back would be 28 metres. Whilst it is not an opening on the dwelling being considered but a raised platform, given the intervening distance in excess of 35 metres between the patio and the rear elevation of 47 Kestrel Road, which accords of the guidance for two and three storey dwellings in close proximity, any overlooking generated would not be of demonstrable harm to any amenities of Kestrel Road as to justify refusal of planning permission.

Parking The proposal would not increase the total number of bedrooms at the property and would not alter the existing parking arrangements. As such, there would be no impacts on current parking standards and no objections are raised in this regard. Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. However the development would not be CIL liable given the nature of the proposal. Retrospective Nature The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 provides the opportunity for the submission of retrospective applications under Section 73A to regularise any breaches of planning and therefore no objection is raised to the works having first been carried out. This process does not prevent the proposal being assessed on its own merits as set out above whereby the impact to the character of the area, and neighbouring amenities is been deemed acceptable. Concern has been expressed that the scheme has been amended to become acceptable during the application process with the addition of screening. Whilst the patio / raised platform as constructed would generate unacceptable overlooking and loss of privacy to neighbouring properties the National Planning Policy Framework under paragraph 54 states that ‘local planning authorities should consider whether otherwise unacceptable development could be made acceptable through the use of conditions or planning obligations.’ As such, given that screening can be secured through a condition to overcome the adverse overlooking and loss of privacy that the current situation gives rise to, it would have been unreasonable to not accept the provision of screening within the application. Screening It was raised by Councillor Capon that the proposed screening may not be sustainable to mitigate the privacy issues from the patio. It is noted that the peeled reed natural fencing is not of high quality design and would not appear as a permanent feature. The reed fencing has therefore been considered and it is deemed that given the need for continuous maintenance as well as noting that this type of fencing could potentially be stretched to form additional gaps which would give rise to unacceptable overlooking and loss of privacy, it is not considered appropriate in this instance. Whilst the current screening has not been considered appropriate or favourable the above assessment has been formed on the basis of a 1.8 metre screening that provides no overlooking. As such it is considered necessary and reasonable that a condition is impose that details of the screening is provided to the Local Planning Authority to be approved within one calendar month and then subsequently erected within two calendar month from the notice of approval of the discharge of condition. The approved screening would thereafter be permanently retained and maintained.

Whilst it is undesirable that details of the screening have not been provided within the current application, the assessment above is related to any form of permanent structure that prevents overlooking, which for example could be a brick wall or obscured glasswork. As such with this imposed condition the proposal is deemed acceptable and details of the sustainability would be assessed through the imposed condition. Public Observations Concern was raised by the occupant of 216 Kempshott Lane in regards to the disruption already experienced as a result of the extensions approved by the extension application, in particular the overshadowing and loss of light. This was assessed at the time and therefore cannot be reviewed within the current application. Notwithstanding this, the additional impacts of the patio and its screening has been assessed as above and found acceptable. It was also expressed that a precedent was set during the construction of 216 Kempshott Lane (in relation to elevated patios), which was amended during the planning process (planning reference 16/01336/FUL refers). The planning file was reviewed for this application, and it is confirmed that the elevated patio was requested to be amended by the Case Officer on the basis of overlooking to 214 Kempshott Lane, whereby it was recommended that the terraced was lowered. The re sizing of the patio away from the boundary (as an alternative to lowering it) was the applicant’s decision as a response to the initial concerns. Overlooking was still a concern from the initial re sizing and as a result of further communication to the Case Officer the application was further amended to increase the height of the screening on the northern elevation to reduce the potential overlooking. Notwithstanding the above information, each application is assessed on its own individual merits and therefore 216 Kempshott Lane it is not considered to be a precedent for the current application. It is also notable that the patio at 216 Kempshott Lane was not constructed as approved, a much more simple patio was erected. Concern was also expressed in regards to building safety regulations and the current fencing. Building regulations are a separate matter to planning applications, therefore this matter would not fall within the remit of assessing planning applications. Lastly additional enforcement issues in relation to materials and use of the access to the substation has also been raised. The current application is for the patio only and the other discrepancies and potential breaches of planning are being investigated. Other Matters The site lies within the 'locally' defined Basingstoke Upstream Critical Drainage Area (UCDA) and Critical Drainage Area (CDA) as defined on the Adopted Local Plan Policies Map. The site is also within Flood Zone 1 (in having a low probability of fluvial flooding).

Policy EM7 'Managing flood risk' of the Adopted Local Plan sets out the Council's approach to considering flood risk. This requires applications to be supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) for sites within locally defined critical drainage areas and upstream critical drainage areas. Footnote 26 of this policy states that "these CDAs are not CDAs 'as notified to the LPA by the Environment Agency' as defined in the NPPF". Whilst the nature/level of detail contained within any FRA will depend upon the scale and type of the proposal, the accompanying text to Policy EM7 acknowledges that developments located in Flood Zone 1 would not normally require an FRA. However, exceptions are recommended for those locations where a new development is likely to overload the capacity of the existing drainage system. In this respect, the proposal seeks retrospective permission for a patio/raised platform. Whilst Policy EM7 requires an FRA for all sites within or upstream of a Critical Drainage Area, given the scale of the proposal, it is considered unlikely to overload the capacity of the existing drainage system. An FRA has not therefore been requested on this occasion. It is important to highlight that such development would be subject to separate Building Control legislation. The site also lies within the 'locally' defined Basingstoke Groundwater Protection Zones 2 and 3 as defined on the Adopted Local Plan Policies Map. Policy EM6 'Water Quality' of the Adopted Local Plan sets out the Council's approach to considering water quality. In order to protect and improve water quality, potentially contaminating development proposals within Source Protection Zones will need to demonstrate that groundwater and surface water is adequately protected to prevent a deterioration of water quality and pollution of the water source. In this respect, the proposal seeks retrospective permission for a patio/raised platform. It is the Council's view that this proposal would not be a potentially contaminating development. Therefore, though the site lies within the locally defined Groundwater Protection Zones 2 and 3, due to the scale and type of development, no information has been formally requested to demonstrate the groundwater and surface water is to be adequately protected to prevent a deterioration of water quality and pollution of the water source. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the


- Location Plan - Drawing Number: PT/003 - Block Plan - Drawing Number: PT/002 - Site Plan with screening - Drawing Number: PT/004 – dated 22/07/2019 - Section Photos


2 The materials used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture to those on the approved plans and application forms.

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

3 Notwithstanding the details shown within one calendar month a scheme

detailing from the date of this Notice of Approval details of the proposed screening shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority. Once approved in writing the scheme shall thereafter be erected within two calendar months from the date it is approval and permanently retained and maintained in that position. The scheme shall include the following details, materials, fixing and heights.

REASON: To protect the longterm privacy and amenity of the adjacent property and to prevent overlooking, in accordance with Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029.




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.



- 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;


App No.: 19/01193/RET

Site plan

App No.: 19/01193/RET

Section Photos

960mm 770mm 630mm 445mm

App No.: 19/01193/RET

Proposed Site Plan with Screening


Item No. 7

Application no: 19/01470/PIP


Site Address Land Adjoining Clift Surgery, Minchens Lane, Bramley, Hampshire

Proposal Application for Permission in Principle for 4-6 no. residential units.

Registered: 31 May 2019 Expiry Date: 12 August 2019


Permission in Principle

Case Officer: Trevor Campbell-Smith 01256 845661

Applicant: Charles Elliott Properties Ltd

Agent: Mr DG Marlow

Ward: Bramley and Sherfield

Ward Member(s): Cllr V Rowland Cllr N Robinson

Parish: Bramley CP OS Grid Reference: 465096 159598

Recommendation: That Permission in Principle is Granted for a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 6 dwellings on the site and is subject to a list of expectations that need to be submitted at the Technical Design Consent stage. These are listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval The location, land use and amount of development is considered to be acceptable and as the council cannot currently demonstrate a 5 year Housing Land Supply the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Paragraph 11 of the NPPF. General Comments: This application is before the committee due to the number of objections received and the Officer's recommendation for approval. Background 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). A PIP application cannot be a development that is major, household, habitats or Schedule 1 EIA development. This PIP application establishes whether a site is suitable in-principle for residential led development ie minor development that is less than 10 dwellings. The scope of any PIP, and therefore consideration of it, is limited to location, land use and amount of development; conditions cannot be imposed.


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. Planning Policy The site lies outside of any settlement policy boundary and is therefore considered to lie in a countryside location. In addition the site lies within an Upstream Critical Drainage Area, there is a Byway which passes to the north of the site and the site is also located in the Outer zone in respect of the AWE. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (February 2019) Section 2 - Achieving Sustainable Development 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 Adopted 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 SS7 - Nuclear Installations Policy CN1 - Affordable Housing Policy CN3 - Housing Mix for Market Housing Policy CN6 - Infrastructure Policy CN7 - Essential facilities and services Policy CN8 - Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities Policy CN9 - Transport Policy EM1 - Landscape Policy EM4 - Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation Policy EM5 - Green Infrastructure Policy EM6 - Water Quality Policy EM7 - Managing flood risk Policy EM9 - Sustainable Water Use Policy EM10 - Delivering High Quality Development Policy EM12 - Pollution Bramley Neighbourhood Plan (2017) Policy H1 (New Housing Development) Policy H2 (Provision of Housing to Meet Local Needs) Policy D1 (Protecting, Complementing and Enhancing the Historic Character and Rural Setting of Bramley)

Policy D2 (Design of New Development) Policy RE3 (Protection and Enhancement of the Natural Environment) Policy T1 (Improving the Footpath and Cycle Network) Policy T2 (Improving Road Safety) Policy CVA1 (Bramley Community Valued Assets) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Housing Supplementary Planning Document Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees Supplementary Planning Document (2018) Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2018)

Section 1 - Introduction Section 6 - Arrangement of buildings and creation of spaces Section 7 - Cycle storage and vehicle parking Section 8 - High Quality Buildings Section 9 - Materials and detailing Section 10 - Residential Amenity Appendix 3 - Waste and Recycling Appendix 4 - Space Standards

Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document Other material documents The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations as amended Department for Transport Manual for Streets Description of Site The application site is an irregularly shaped and undeveloped field immediately to the north and west of Clift Surgery. The site is bounded to the south and east by 1.2 metre high post and rail fencing with a galvanised metal gate in the southern boundary giving access to the site via the car park to Clift Surgery. The northern and western boundary is marked by hedging and trees. Beyond the northern boundary is a Byway which also gives access to the electricity substation to the north west of the site. Currently access to the site is made via a gate in the southern boundary of the site via the Clift Surgery car park. Whilst the Layout Plan states that the existing access to Minchens Lane is to be closed these work had already been undertaken at the time of the Officer’s site visit. Proposal This PIP application seeks permission for 4 to 6 residential units on the site. The application has been submitted to address the `in principle` erection of dwellings on the site.

Consultations Bramley Parish Council: “I can confirm that Bramley Parish Council has now met to consider the above planning application. The Parish Council object to this application on the following grounds: Local Plan policy SS6 - the proposed development is outside settlement policy boundary, and no housing need is demonstrated. This is also against Neighbourhood Plan policy H1 and H2. Access to the site via the surgery car park will be problematic. Logical progression of the surgery car park is for separate in and out access - the Parish Council has already written to the surgery in support of this. Should planners be minded to pass this application then access to this site will conflict with the surgery car park. If this progression does not happen, this issue will be even worse, and the number of surgery parking spaces will be compromised. A separate access onto Minchens Lane will cause road safety issues due to the number of access points onto a short space of narrow country lane. It should also be noted that when the surgery extension was built, the car park had to be closed for safety reasons. Therefore this development is against Neighbourhood Plan policy T2. Self build/custom build plots may well lead to a protracted development period, thus causing a longer inconvenience factor for the surgery patients The SHELAA statement is that this site is not suitable or in line with Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan at this time. Local Plan policy EM1 - with the recent development of the St James Park site and the permission given for conversion to residential units of Minchens Court, further development in this area is considered to be 'overdevelopment'. Local Plan policy EM4 - this land is currently an open field, and building on this site would significantly change the nature of the neighbouring land. Local Plan policy EM10 - Councillors felt that this development would not enhance the local area, but would lead built up feel in what is currently a fairly rural area. This is also against the Neighbourhood Plan policies D1 and D2. Neighbourhood Plan policy RE3 - this site is close to are large area of green space identified by the Neighbourhood Plan. Cllr V Rowland: I wish to object on this application. The Policies that I wish to object on are as follows Policy SS6 - New Housing in the Countryside This is new development in the Countryside and does not comply with any of the excepting conditions with the Policy.

Policy EM1 – Landscape The addition of this potential development would create a "build up" of residential dwellings in an already developed space. With St James Court, Minchens Lane and the permitted development of 14 "flats" in Minchens Court I believe this will be overdevelopment of the area. Policy EM4 - Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation I believe that this development on previously open areas could significantly change the nature of the land and the species that inhabit it. Policy EM10 - Delivering High Quality Development I dont believe this will provide a positive addition to the area. As previously advised I feel this will be overdevelopment of a rural area. I also support refusal on the policies in the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan of; POLICY D1: PROTECTING, COMPLEMENTING AND ENHANCING THE HISTORIC CHARACTER AND RURAL SETTING OF BRAMLEY POLICY D2: DESIGN OF NEW DEVELOPMENT POLICY RE3: PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT as this potential development is close to a green space as identified by the NP POLICY T2: IMPROVING ROAD SAFETY IN BRAMLEY Generating additional traffic on Minchens Lane would not be in the interests of the community - coupled with the Clift Surgery, Minchens Court, and St James Park. All of this coupled with the fact that Bramley has taken well over the 200 homes as outlined in the Local Plan and therefore this should be refused. Highways Team: No objection (no conditions) to permission in principle. Policy: Objection. These comments received prior to the loss of 5 year Housing Land Supply. Public Observations: 51 representations have been made with regard to this application, 49 objections and 2 comments. The matters raised are as follows: Objections

Access from the Clift Surgery car park will add significant traffic and difficulty for staff and patients accessing the surgery.

Construction traffic and deliveries will be hazardous to the frail and elderly patients of the surgery.

There is no local need for these dwellings.

The proposal does not represent sustainable development.

Bramley's infrastructure is inadequate.

There is inadequate space for 3 junctions to Minchens land in such close proximity to one another and such an arrangement would be detrimental to highway safety

Comment

Swift bricks should be used in the construction of the development.

Relevant Planning History None Assessment Background The site is an undeveloped field and no applications for planning permission for the redevelopment of the site subject to this application have been received prior to that now under consideration. Location The application site is an irregularly shaped and undeveloped field immediately to the north and west of Clift Surgery which lies outside of any settlement policy boundary and is therefore considered to lie in a countryside location.

Principle of development The NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities to identify a five year supply of specific deliverable sites to meet housing needs. In addition, and in line with the Housing Delivery Test published in February 2019, a 20% buffer should be added to the borough's supply. 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 boroughs 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 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 only locations where this position would not apply is in parishes with recently made Neighbourhood Plans that allocate land for housing. The parishes with this extra protection are Whitchurch, until the end of September 2019, and Kingsclere until October 2020.

- National Planning Policy Paragraph 11 of the NPPF states that decisions should apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The three dimensions to achieving sustainable development are defined in the NPPF as: economic, social and environmental. The economic role of the NPPF requires proposals to contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy. The social role requires planning to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities and states that it should create a high quality built environment. The environmental role states that the natural built and historic environment should be protected and enhanced and should mitigate and adapt to climate change. - Economic The proposed development would encourage development and associated economic growth through the actual physical building works. The future occupants would also undoubtedly contribute to the local economy and to the continued viability of local services in surrounding villages. However, as this would apply to an increase in a maximum of 6 dwellings only, any benefit to the local economy would be negligible. The economic role of the development is therefore considered to be limited. - Social The social aspect of sustainable development would be met through the contribution made to the housing stock. Therefore, although there would be a limited benefit as a result of the social role that this development would bring in terms of the provision of maximum of 6 dwellings, this can only be afforded very limited weight as the contribution of a this maximum number of dwellings in this regard is not considered to be significant. - Environmental With regard to the environmental role of this development, the development could reasonably be expected to demonstrate a degree of inherent sustainability through compliance with Council supported energy efficiency and Building Regulations standards. Given the location of the proposal relative to the built forms in the immediate vicinity it is not considered to be located within an isolated location and is considered to have reasonable access to the facilities and resources of Bramley. - Local Plan The current lack of a 5 year housing land supply means that the local plan is considered to be out of date in the determination of planning applications which seek the erection of dwellings. Nonetheless the Local Plan remains a material consideration and is afforded some weight. The site is located outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary 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 (paragraph 4.70) 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. In the countryside, 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. 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.

Neighbourhood Plan. As with the Local Plan the current lack of a 5 year housing land supply means that the Neighbourhood Plan is considered to have diminished weight in the determination of planning applications which seek the erection of dwellings. Nonetheless the Neighbourhood Plan remains a material consideration and is afforded some weight Policy H1 (New Housing Development) Of the Neighbourhood Plan states that: “ “New housing development outside the Bramley Settlement Policy Boundary will only be supported if it is in accordance with relevant Local Plan policies for new housing in the countryside.”

Conclusion The proposed development is considered to be contrary to Policies SS1 and SS6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 and Policy HA1 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan. However, as discussed previously, the lack of a 5 year housing land supply means that these policies are out of date in the assessment of applications for housing development and that the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in Paragraph 11 of the NPPF is activated. The application site, while outside the SPB is immediately adjacent to it and is considered to be in a non isolated sustainable location. Therefore whilst the social and economic benefits of the proposal are considered to be negligible the development is considered to represent sustainable development. Therefore the principle of development of 4 to 6 dwellings is considered to be acceptable.

Amount of development This PIP concerns the provision of 4 to 6 residential units on the site, which measures 2,800 square metres. This would result in a density of 14 dwellings per hectare for 4 dwellings and 21 dwellings per hectare for 6 dwellings. The applicant is not required to provide any details relating to the design and layout at the PIP stage and no supplementary information has been submitted in this regard. It should be noted that the PIP decision notice must set out a minimum and maximum amount of development. As the application has not been submitted as `4-6 dwellings`, the minimum amount of development at the site would be 4 dwellings and the maximum amount of development is 6 residential units. The maximum of 6 residential units proposed would lead to a density of 20 dwellings per hectare. This compares with the development to the opposite side of Minchens Lane at a density of 18 dwellings per hectare. As such it is considered that the maximum density of the development at this site would not be out of keeping or incongruous to the surrounding built environment. As such, whilst the configuration, positioning within the site and building heights are unknown, it is considered that sufficient space exists within the site to accommodate a development of 6 dwellings which, provided a suitable design and layout is proposed, can be successfully integrated with the surrounding built form. Paragraph 44 of the Government guidance on Permission in Principle states that "The requirements for a valid technical details consent application are the same as those for an application for full planning permission". Paragraph 46 of the Guidance goes on to state that "Local authorities should take a proportionate approach to any information they request in support of applications for technical details consent, which should be relevant, necessary and material to the application in question". As such, it is would not be necessary to include such items as means of access, siting, elevations and materials in the list of information which the LPA expects to see at the TDC stage as this is required in any event by regulation.

Housing Mix Policy C3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan and Policy HS2 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan seek to ensure an appropriate mix of dwelling sizes within new development. No details in this regard have been submitted at this stage, however full details in this regard and compliance with Local Plan and Neighbourhood plan Policies would be required at TDC stage.

Affordable Housing Policy CN1 of the Local Plan requires 40% affordable housing on all development proposals that result in a net increase in dwellings. In accordance with the Local Plan policy, all residential development proposals for 11 units or more (outside the AONB), or exceeding a combined gross floor space 1000 square metres, will be required to provide the affordable housing onsite based upon 70% for rent and 30% for intermediate affordable housing.

As a maximum of 6 units are being proposed, affordable housing provision on site would be required at the TDC stage but only where the combined gross floor space exceeds 1000 square metres.

Accessible and Adaptable Homes Policies CN1 and CN3 requires provision of 15% of both affordable and market homes on site to be 'accessible and adaptable' to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change. The development mix and size of unit is not required to be known at this PIP stage but there would be a requirement for it at the TDC stage were the application otherwise acceptable.

Trees Policies EM1 of the Local Plan and D1 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan seek to preserve Landscape character and the rural setting of sites. Trees form an important element of such character and provide visual amenity value to sites and their wider surroundings Well maintained agricultural hedgerows stand on the perimeter of the site to the north and west. Some trees are scattered through the hedgerows. The hedgerows are further interconnected to the wider agricultural landscape. The plot is overlooked from the nearby Byway, Bramley 7, which runs east to west immediately adjacent to and parallel the northern boundary of the site. There is some concern that building works and associated services will encroach into the root protection areas of the hedgerows and small trees, which will have a detrimental impact on their health and stability. As such, any future TDC would need to be supported by a Tree Survey, an Arboricultural Impact Assessment, and an Arboricultural Method Statement to inform as to the impact of the proposed development would have on existing trees at the site, were all other matters otherwise acceptable.

Landscape Policies EM1 of the Local Plan and D1 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan seek to preserve Landscape character and the rural setting of sites. The site is located at the rural edge of settlement, Minchens Lane is essentially a country lane beyond this point and bordered to the west by indigenous trees and hedgerows. The proposed erection of 4 to 6 dwellings in a well-established rural setting is likely to urbanise existing character in a semirural edge of settlement location. However in this regard the existing development under construction to the opposite side of Minchens Lane and the development permitted to the south of the site is considered to offset the landscape impacts of the proposed development.

Any future TDC would need to be supported by details regarding landscaping, hard surfacing, boundary treatments and retaining walls.

Parking/highways There must be adequate space within each of the proposed plots to allow for cycle and vehicle parking, vehicle manoeuvring and refuse storage and collection facilities. The highways Officer has raised no objection to the proposal but has made observations with regard to details that would be required in support of any future TDC Stage application. The Highway Officer advises that a new access to the highway will require a S171 to be entered into with HCC as Highway Authority. In this regard it is noted that no details as to the proposed access to the site have been provided at this stage and that as such this will only be required if a new access to Minchens Lane is to be formed. The Highway Officer also advises that since trip generation is likely to increase and due to the nature of the road, whereby a junction is in close proximity to the access and there is a national speed limit restriction, details of visibility splays are requested. These will need to demonstrate adequate visibility is afforded the site appropriate to recorded speeds, furthermore it is likely that a condition is put in place to ensure that any vegetation within the splay is contained to a maximum height of 0.6m. The details raised by the Highway Officer would be needed as part of any TDC application together with:

A study of the proposed access to and from the highway to demonstrate how the movements associated with the proposed dwellings would impact highway safety and the safety and convenience of the users of the surgery car park.

Electric Vehicle Charging Point provision is required in accordance with the Parking SPD

The details of cycle parking provision on site in accordance with the standards set out in the Parking SPD.

The details of the refuse collection strategy for the site. If a refuse vehicle is required to enter the site then the tracking should be provided which demonstrates that a local refuse vehicle can safely access and egress the site. If the refuse vehicle will not enter the site then refuse collection points must be provided which are located in accordance with the maximum carry distances specified within the Design and Sustainability SPD ie Appendix 3 for the Storage and the Collection of Waste and Recycling.

Land Use This Pip application relates to an undeveloped field. The principle of the use of this land for housing has already been addressed in the Location section of this report

and is considered to be acceptable, as such this section deals with the specific impacts of the development upon the site.

Land Contamination Policy EM12 of the Local Plan states that development will be permitted provided that it does not result in pollution which is detrimental to the quality of life or poses unacceptable risks to health or the natural environment. A land contamination report/remediation scheme could be secured as part of the TDC if the proposal were acceptable in principle.

Flood Risk and Drainage The application site is located in an Upstream Critical Drainage Area and in such locations Policy EM7 requires that development proposals are supported by and appropriate Flood Risk Assessment. Furthermore Bramley Neighbourhood Plan Policy RE1 seeks to reduce flood risk to new and seeks the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems. No details in this regard have been submitted at this stage, however full details in this regard and compliance with Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan Policies would be required at TDC stage.

Biodiversity Policy EM4 of the Local Plan and Policy RE3 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan seek to preserve the biodiversity interests of site and where possible provide habitat enhancements. The site is situated in a rural location, bounded by mature well-connected hedgerows which separate the site from extensive farmland beyond. Therefore an assessment of the likely use of the site by protected species should be submitted with any future planning application for the site. As such, any future TDC will need to be supported by an Ecological Survey. Other matters - Community Infrastructure Requirements Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council implemented its Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on the 25th June 2018. CIL will apply to the development consented through the PIP route if a TDC has been granted. Charges will become due from the date that a chargeable development is commenced. In this case as the principle of the development applied for is accepted an informative will be added to the decision notice advising the applicant of this. - S106 Legal Agreement Policies of the Local Plan and the accompanying Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document seek to ensure that development does not result in an adverse effect on existing infrastructure, and makes appropriate

provision to mitigate documented impacts. It is therefore common to anticipate that development would by way of Obligation (legal agreement) make appropriate provision/ improvements in line with the advice provided within the NPPF. Where mitigation is sought, due consideration has been given to the tests that a planning obligation must be (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. However, regarding local infrastructure, it should be noted that planning obligations cannot be placed on PIP`s, and can only be secured at a subsequent TDC stage.

Sustainable Water Use Policy EM9 (Sustainable water use) of the Local Plan requires all new homes to meet a water efficiency standard of 110 litres per person per day. Where the proposal acceptable in principle there would be a requirement for this detail to be submitted at the TDC stage. - Neighbour Comments The majority of the neighbour comments received focus upon the proposed access to the site and the impact this will have on the convenience and safety of those using the surgery. Other concerns raised relate to the space for, and layout of, accesses to Minchens Lane and their impact on highway safety, the impact of construction vehicle movements upon the safety and convenience of Surgery users, the adequacy of the infrastructure within Bramley and the assertion that the dwellings proposed are not needed. This application is for permission in principle and as set out previously details with regard to access to the site, how this will be achieved and its impact upon highway safety and the convenience of users of nearby sites will be required at TDC stage. As set out above neither CiL nor S106 contributions towards infrastructure improvements can be taken in relation to a PIP application, but such matters will be for consideration at the submission of TDC application. The issues surrounding the weight given to the requirement of Local Plan Policy SS6 and the need to demonstrate a locally agreed need for dwellings is discussed in the Location section of this report above. Summary The site lies outside any Settlement Policy Boundary. The lack of a 5 year housing land supply means that policies SS1 and SS6 of the Local Plan and Policy HA1 of the Neighbourhood Plan are out of date in the assessment of applications for housing development and that the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in Paragraph 11 of the NPPF is engaged. The application site, while outside the SPB is immediately adjacent to it and is considered to be in a sustainable location. Furthermore it is considered that the Location of the Proposal, the

proposed Land use and the Amount of development proposed are acceptable and no further material considerations indicate that the proposal is unacceptable. On this basis, it is considered that this PIP application can be supported and is therefore recommended for approval. However, it is to be noted that a PIP is not a planning permission, it is a precursor to it. A planning permission only exists when the PIP and TDC have been granted. No planning conditions can be added to a PIP although conditions can be imposed at the TDC stage. Once granted a PIP ceases to have effect after 3 years. However, given the issues identified above, a PIP can set out the expectations of a LPA relating to a detailed scheme and what is required at the TDC stage and these are outlined below. TECHNICAL DETAILS CONSENT (TDC) KEY DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS In accordance with Planning Practice Guidance (Paragraph: 019 Reference ID: 58-019-20170728) Local Planning Authorities can inform applicants about what they expect to see at the TDC stage. The following set out the matters that Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council would like to see addressed at the TDC stage regarding this Permission in Principle proposal:

A completed technical details consent application form;

A location plan, block plan, floor plans and elevations;

A design and access statement;

Details of access to the highway including visibility splays;

A detailed scheme of parking provision for the site;

Details of refuse and cycle storage provision;

An ecology survey;

A desk based assessment of the archaeological potential for the site;

Details of the proposed housing mix;

Affordable Housing provision;

Lifetime Homes provision;

Arboricultural survey and impact assessment;

Details of hard and soft landscaping, boundary treatments and any retaining walls;

Ecological Survey and Biodiversity Enhancement Plan;

Flood Risk Assessment;

Details of Sustainable water use in accordance with Local Plan Policy EM7;

Contaminated land study and Mitigation details if necessary. Informatives: 1. This permission in principle (PIP) shall cease to have effect three years after

the date of this Decision Notice. The Technical Details Consent (TDC) relating to the proposed development must be granted prior to the expiration of the PIP.

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:

- proactively offering a pre-application advice (in accordance with paragraphs 39 - 46);

In this instance: - the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit; - was provided with pre-application advice; - the application was acceptable as submitted and no further assistance was

required.


3 The Local Planning Authority would recommend early pre-application discussion

on the Technical Details Consent (TDC).

4 The Technical Details Consent (TDC) Key Development considerations that are required are as follows:

- A Design and Access Statement which addresses how any proposed

development would: (i) Respect the established pattern and character of surrounding development; and (ii) Ensure that an acceptable level of residential amenity would be available to the occupants of the flats in terms of amenity space, privacy, outlook and levels of natural light, in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2018 and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- Affordable housing provision would be required on site but only where the

combined gross floor space exceeds 1000 square metres, in accordance with Policy CN1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), Housing Supplementary Planning Document 2018 and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- The provision of 15% of both affordable and market homes on site to be ‘accessible and adaptable’ to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change, in accordance with Policies CN1 and CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), Housing Supplementary Planning Document 2018 and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- A Tree Survey, an Arboricultural Impact Assessment, and an Arboricultural Method Statement, in accordance with BS5837: 2012 “Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction”, in accordance with Policy EM1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- An Ecological survey in accordance with Policy EM4 of the Basingstoke and

Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), Landscape and Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document 2018 and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- A surface water drainage scheme in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- New homes are required to meet a water efficiency standard of 110 litres per person per day, in accordance with Policy EM9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- A site plan which displays the proposed access points and demonstrates suitable levels of intervisibility can be provided from the site access, both for vehicles and pedestrians. The proposed site plan should also display any pedestrian routes within the site and display the proposed parking layout, in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- The number of parking spaces provided on site should be provided in accordance with the standards set out in the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The spaces should measure a minimum of 2.7m x 5.2m in accordance with the dimensions specified in the SPD, in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- An electric vehicle charge point (EVCP) provision is required on site in accordance with the standards set out in the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- The applicant will be required to assess the likely trip generation of the proposed development and how the access will impact upon the safety and convenience of users of the surgery in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- The applicant should consider the site’s accessibility by sustainable modes of transport and proximity to facilities in accordance with Policy CN9 in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- The applicant will be required to provide details of cycle parking which should be provided in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), the Parking Supplementary Planning

Document (SPD) and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- Details of the refuse collection strategy for the site should be provided. If a refuse vehicle is required to enter the site then the tracking should be provided which demonstrates that a local refuse vehicle can safely access and egress the site. If the refuse vehicle will not enter the site then refuse collection points must be provided which are located in accordance with the maximum carry distances as outlined in the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) ie Appendix 3 for the Storage and the Collection of Waste and Recycling, and in accordance with Policies EM10 and CN9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019).

- Details should be provided of the housing mix of the scheme and how this is considered to meet the requirements of Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policy H2 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan and The Housing SPD (2018) and guidance within the NPPF (February 2019).

- Details should be provided of the hard and soft landscaping proposals with regard to the site together with details of proposed boundary treatments and any retaining walls in accordance with Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, Policy D1 of the Bramley Neighbourhood Plan and the guidance with the NPPF (February 2019).

- The applicant should provide a Flood risk Assessment with regard to the site in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029 and the guidance within the NPPF (February 2019).

- The applicant should provide a desktop study with regard to land contamination at the site and details of any mitigation measures to be undertaken to deal with any contamination risks identified in accordance with Policy EM12 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029 and the guidance within the NPPF (February 2019).

5. 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 be exempt from any CIL payments. CIL will apply to the development consented through the permission in principle route if a TDC has been granted. Charges will become due from the date that a chargeable development is commenced.

6. A S106 Planning Obligation cannot be secured under a PIP application. It

has been identified that contributions towards Open Space and Affordable Housing are likely to be required in accordance with Policies CN6, EM5 and CN1 (if applicable) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan (2011-2029), the Planning Obligations for Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018).

App.: 19/01470/PIP

Location plan