Development Consultation Forum

1. Development Consultation Forum Copseys Nursery/Manor Farm 11th October 2012

2. Programme • 18.00 - Introduction – Councillor Guest • 18.05 - Explanation of process and planning history – Chris Murray • 18.15 - Presentation by Developers • 18.35 - Invited speakers • 18.45 - Written consultee responses – David Eaves • 18.55 - Developer response to issues raised • 19.05 - Councillor opportunity to ask questions • 19.35 - Summary of key points – Chris Murray • 19.45 - Chairman closes Forum meeting

3. The purpose of the Forum is… • To allow developer to explain development proposals directly to councillors, public & key stakeholders at an early stage • To allow Councillors to ask questions • Informs officer pre application discussions with developer • Identify any issues that may be considered in any formal application. • Enable the developer to shape an application to address community issues

4. The Forum is not meant to… • Negotiate the proposal in public • Commit councillors or local planning authority to a view • Allow objectors to frustrate the process • Address or necessarily identify all the issues that will need to be considered in a future planning application • Take the place of normal planning application process or role of the Development Management Committee

5. The outcome of the Forum will be… • Developer will have a list of main points to consider • Stakeholders and public will be aware of proposals and can raise their concerns • Councillors will be better informed on significant planning issues • Officers will be better informed as to community expectations during their pre application negotiations with developers

6. Planning History • The site is currently used for limited Horticulture (Copseys Nursery) and as Agricultural fields (Manor Farm). • The site is located outside the built up area. It is therefore currently classified as Countryside. • As such the site is not at present allocated for development. • The land forms part of the Emsworth Gap - Saved Policy UF1 of the Local Plan and Policy CS11 of the Core Strategy. • Part of the site identified in the Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) ref. UE4. • This identifies the land in two parts with an indicative number of dwellings of 105 (Manor Farm) and 70 (Copseys Nursery).

9. Planning History Previous planning applications of particular relevance: • Erection of glasshouse at Market Garden, Spindle Gardens. Permitted 22.05.67 18470/1 Heated greenhouse at market garden, Spindle Close. Permitted 19.01.71 20496/1 Outline Residential Development Land at east end of Fifth Avenue – Land at Manor Farm. Refused 11.02.88 Current Proposals: The Developers have held Public Exhibitions and meetings in relation to the current proposals. In addition the proposals were considered at a previous Development Consultation Forum on the 15th March 2012.

10. Policy Background • National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) • Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 • Saved Policies from Local Plan (HBDWLP) • Allocations document (under preparation) • Contributions Policy (SPD) • Supplementary Planning Guidance • South East Plan

11. Policy Background Applications are determined based on: • The NPPF, Local Plan Policies 2011 and Saved Policies from the Local Plan 2005. • Any other material planning considerations • Policies and material considerations must be given appropriate weight.

12. Key Planning Issues Planning Policy Local Plan • The site is outside urban area and therefore currently contrary to policy CS17 of the Local Plan (Core Strategy) • The site is in the undeveloped gap between Havant and Emsworth and therefore currently contrary to CS11 • In general, Planning Policy would not recommended unallocated sites to come forward in advance of the adoption of Local Plan (Allocations). The exception - is if there was a shortfall in housing delivery that could not be satisfied by release of the reserve sites. • The 2011 Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) shows that the Borough currently has a healthy 5 year supply of housing, therefore the Council can deliver its housing need. The AMR will be up-dated and will assess this in December 2012.

13. Key Planning Issues Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) • Para. 216 of the NNPF states that “Decision-takers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging Local Plans according to the stage of preparation (the more advanced, the greater the weight)”. • Planning Policy consider that a weight could arguably be attached to the policies in the Allocations Plan, once the formal consultation has taken place, and the Council has had an opportunity to duly consider and response to the representations received. • Consultation on the Draft Allocations Plan is scheduled from 9 Nov until 21 Dec 2012. It is likely to be at least March 2013 before the responses received are processed and duly considered.

14. Key Planning Issues Planning Policy Local Plan – work to date • UE4 is a potential housing site in the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA). • Informal consultation on housing in the Local Plan (Allocations) took place in May-June ’12. It proposed 3 options for housing delivery in Havant and Bedhampton – A, B and C. UE4 was in all 3 options – part of and all of the site. Option B was by far the most popular option. This included all of UE4. • The Draft Local Plan (Allocations) will identify the Council’s preferred housing sites. The feedback from all public consultations along with the SA and evidence base studies will inform the selection of sites. • The Draft Local Plan (Allocations) is scheduled for consideration by Extraordinary Cabinet on 24 October.

15. Key Planning Issues Planning Policy Other Planning Policy considerations • 30 to 40% of the new homes to be affordable and for these homes to be distributed throughout the development without an undue concentration • All the new homes to achieve level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes • An Employment and Skills Plan is required for the construction phase of the development

16. Key Planning Issues Highways and Access • Assessment of additional traffic generation and highway impacts • Impact on the Level Crossing and traffic flows • Potential pedestrian bridge across railway • Access from Glenleigh Park, Hallett Road, Fifth Avenue and Blenheim Gardens. • Accessibility to public transport • Parking issues • Pedestrian and cycle provision

17. Key Planning Issues Built Form and Design • The impact of the development would need to be assessed in its context in Denvilles and the character and appearance of the area. Impact on Surrounding Residents • Residential amenity – overlooking, privacy, vehicular movements etc.. Trees and Wildlife • Trees on site are subject to TPO’s • Possible impact on protected species Environment • Drainage and flooding • Surface water drainage • Foul drainage issues

18. Key Planning Issues Residential Mix Can the No. and size of dwellings be suitably provided? Is the mix of house types and sizes acceptable. Affordable housing provision. Noise/Pollution Issues Impact of Traffic Noise Design/landscaping implications Air Quality Possible Land Contamination

19. Key Planning Issues Open Space • Location and uses of land • Allotment provision • Impact on Emsworth Strategic Gap Historic Environment • Archaeological issues Developer Contributions • Possible contributions required towards: • HCC Highway Contributions • Affordable Housing • Open space provision • Education • Various S106 legal requirements • Community Infrastructure Levy (depending on timing of the application)

20. Presentation by Developers

21. Invited Speakers Andrew Norton, Warblington and Denvilles Residents’ Association – Points raised: • Concerns regarding site access • Queues at level crossing, Hallett Road • Cumulative impact of other large schemes on highway and level crossing • Wider highway issues • Greater car ownership than has been allowed for • Highway changes at crossing could increase queues

22. Invited Speakers Andrew Norton, Warblington and Denvilles Residents’ Association – Points raised (cont): • Hallet Road junction issues • Transition in scale between existing and proposed buildings welcomed • Boundary treatment planting welcomed • Noise of site traffic needs to be addressed

23. Consultee Responses Havant and Bedhampton Community Network The main issue that has been brought to our attention is that some residents in the area have had issues with flooding and they are very concerned that the development will exacerbate these problems.

24. Consultee Responses HCC Highways Due to the size of the development highway recommendations will be provided by Hampshire County Council. The key points to be assessed through the applicants assessment of the site: • Developer will need to submit a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan. • The Transport Assessment will need to: - quantify the amount and type of traffic generated - assess the impact of the development traffic on the surrounding network. • The Transport Assessment will particularly need to consider the impact on: Southleigh Road Level Crossing, Southleigh Road/Spindle Close, Southleigh Road/Fifth Avenue, Emsworth Road/Southleigh Road/Pook Lane. Additional junctions that may be impacted include Southleigh Road/Horndean Road; Eastleigh Road/Bartons Road junctions.

25. Consultee Responses • HCC Highways (continued) • Investigation of accident history in the vicinity of the site will need to be carried out and assessed. Any potential exacerbation of accident trends or implications for safety identified will need to be addressed. • The Highway Authority will require any of the off site traffic impacts to be mitigated by either off site highway worksor contributions in line with Hampshire County Councils Transport Contribution Policy. • The developer will need to demonstrate appropriate access to the site for all transport modes. • Should seek to maximise the use of sustainable transport modes. This should include public transport and also walking and cycling links to key services such as the town centre, employment, schools and transport interchanges. • It should be demonstrated that the internal site layout can appropriately accommodate a range of vehicles and that the parking provision is adequate for both cars and cycles. • Any application should demonstrate the phasing and the sequence of construction & how construction traffic will be managed.

26. Consultee Responses HCC Ecology Site is close to Chichester and Langstone Harbours Special Protection Area (SPA).  Harbours are protected under EU law for overwintering populations of migratory waders and Brent Geese.  These birds are vulnerable to disturbance recreational activities close to where they feed / roost.  An increase in local residents resulting from new development can therefore affect the SPA. In addition, the majority of the site is an area identified in the Solent Wader and Brent Goose Strategy as a potential high tide wader roost site.  More surveys are needed to have confidence that site is not being used. 

27. Consultee Responses Natural England views need to be sought. Legally protected speciesThe development would require the demolition of a number of existing buildings these may have the potential to support bats, which are legally protected under UK and EU law. There appears to be a need to remove small areas of vegetation such as scrub, rough grassland and trees.  These areas may also support legally protected species such as reptile and nesting birds. The application should be supported by a full ecological impact assessment

28. Consultee Responses HBC Housing • As yet there are no specific details regarding the provision of affordable housing, however it is understood that the developers are currently in negotiations with a local Registered Provider. • The proposals comprise a full range of housing from 2 to 5 bedroom houses including affordable housing for which demand remains high; currently there are in excess of 4000 households registered requiring all sizes of accommodation across all areas of the Borough. • The current backlog of need means that some applicants for 3 bedroom properties are waiting for in excess of 10 years for an offer of accommodation.

29. Consultee Responses HBC Housing (Continued) • Core Strategy Policy CS9 states that development sites should deliver between 30-40% average affordable housing (57 to 76 units). • Affordable housing should provide a variety of unit sizes and tenures to satisfy current demand. A proportion of shared ownership/shared equity homes should be delivered. • All affordable housing units will be expected to comply to at least level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes

30. Consultee Responses HBC Arboriculturalist • Submission provides a useful overview of the site and the potential impact on trees. • No detailed assessment on individual or groups of trees, therefore difficult to make a complete assessment. • Developer should be mindful of any protected trees on site and any losses should be replaced by mitigation planting. • Some trees on site are worthy of protection and potential development should be planned around these trees to ensure sustainability of tree cover.

31. Main Points of Discussion Developers’ Response to Questions: • Impact on level crossing being assessed • Sight lines at Hallett Road being investigated • Trees at Hallett Road being investigated with an intention to preserve if possible • Transport/Travel assessments to be produced • Improvements to pedestrian crossing being assessed • Noise from pumping station to be addressed via noise assessment/vibration assessment

32. Main Points of DiscussionCouncillors’ Questions • Q. Affordable housing breakdown requested • A. Details to be provided on website • Q. How likely is railway bridge to be provided? • A. Planning application needed and submission intended shortly (preparation work done). Network Rail supportive in principle. • Q. Will affordable units be tenure blind? • A. Affordable housing units to be of at least comparable quality, higher spec in some cases. Externally similar (same materials)

33. Main Points of Discussion • Q. Will tree planting be semi-mature? • A. Mixture: 10% large trees, 50% standard, 40% smaller trees • Q. What is proposed for the future maintenance of landscaping and roads? • A. Not yet resolved but typically larger areas are expected to be maintained by a management company. Roads to be of adoptable standards and offered for adoption by the County

34. Main Points of DiscussionCouncillors’ Questions • Q. Will play area be overlooked by surrounding properties? • A. Standard trees will allow views through to play area form surrounding areas

35. Questions from the floor • Q. Will Hallett cross roads site lines be considered? • Q. Will porous road surface be maintained in the long term? • A. Roads offered for adoption – Cleaning should ensure continued function • Q. Concern regarding TPO tree • A

36. Questions from the floor • Q Traffic queue video – Videos showing queues around level crossing not available on developer’s website as stated. Will they be provided? • A Videos to be added shortly • Q What is life span of porous road blocks? • A Typically 25-50 years – Cost of repair figured into developer contributions • Q What will happen to large Poplar trees to north of site? • A Intention to retain

37. What Happens Next? • Summary notes circulated to attendees • Officers will discuss outcomes with developer • Developer will continue to develop proposals and consider issues raised by Forum • Decision as to form of application and timing of submission rests with developer.