Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report

024601 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon
01
October 2008

Revision 01

Buro Happold

This report has been prepared for the sole benefit, use and information of European Property Ventures (South
Revision Description Issued by Date Checked
Hampshire) Ltd. for the purposes set out in the report or instructions commissioning it. The liability of Buro
00 Draft report for client review RSO 23/09/2008 TC Happold Limited in respect of the information contained in the report will not extend to any third party.

01 Final report RSO 31/10/2008 TC

srv-london02Project Filing024601 - Site Appraisals Houghton Regis and StroudF39
EnvironmentBursledonReports081031 Final report081031 RO 024601 Site Appraisal Report 01.doc

author Richard Orriss

signature

date 31/10/2008

approved Trevor Curson

signature

date 31/10/2008

Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01
Site Appraisal Report October 2008
Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 3 of 73

Buro Happold

4.10 Housing Allocation 23

4.10.1 Hampshire County Council 23
Contents 4.10.2 Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review 23

4.10.3 The South East Plan 23
1 Executive Summary 9
4.10.4 Affordable Housing 23
1.1 Introduction 9
4.11 Implications for development – Planning Policies 24
1.2 Key Benefits 9
5 Socio-Economic and Community 25
1.3 Key Issues 10
5.1 Introduction 25
2 Introduction 13
5.2 Socio-Economic Conditions 25
3 Site Description and Land Uses 14
5.2.1 Population 25
3.1 Introduction 14 5.2.2 Economic and Occupational Status 25
3.2 Site Location 14 5.2.3 Personal Safety 25
3.3 Site Description 15 5.3 Community Involvement 25
3.4 Adjacent Land Uses 16 5.4 Location of Public Facilities 25
3.5 Historical Land Use 17 5.5 Implications for Site Development: Socio-economic 26

4 Planning Policy and Land Use 19 6 Political Overview 27

4.1 Introduction 19 6.1 County Council 27
4.2 Current Planning Instruments 19 6.2 District Council 27
4.3 Proposed Planning Instruments 19 6.3 Parish Council 28
4.4 Regional Spatial Strategy 19
7 Water Resources 29
4.5 Local Development Framework 19
7.1 Surface Water Features 29
4.6 Local Plan 20
7.2 Groundwater 29
4.7 Countryside 22
7.3 Flood Risk Guidance 30
4.8 Agricultural Land Classification 22
7.3.1 Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk 30
4.9 Strategic Gap 23


Buro Happold

7.3.2 Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 30 9.6.1 Key ecological issues 37

7.3.3 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 30 9.6.2 Further Assessment Requirements 38

7.4 Fluvial Flood Risk 31 10 Built Heritage and Archaeology 39

7.5 Surface Water Flooding 31 10.1 Introduction 39

7.6 Implications for Site Development 31 10.2 Archaeology 39

8 Contaminated Land, Geology and Soils 32 10.3 Historic Buildings 39

8.1 Contamination risk assessment 32 10.4 Implications for Site Development 40

8.2 Geology, hydrogeology and hydrology 32 11 Traffic and Transport 41

8.2.1 Potentially Contaminative Activities 32 11.1 Site Location 41

8.2.2 Receptors and Pathways 33 11.2 Bus 41

8.2.3 Risks Associated with Potentially Contaminated Land 33 11.3 Railway 42

8.3 Implications for Site Development and Recommendations 34 11.4 Airport 42

9 Ecology (flora and fauna) 35 11.5 Trip Generation 42

9.1 Introduction 35 11.6 Site Access 43

9.2 Existing Conditions 35 11.7 Planning Policy 43

9.3 Designated Sites 35 11.7.1 Hampshire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011 43

9.3.1 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) 35 11.8 Way Forward 43

9.3.2 Special Protection Areas (SPA) 35 12 Landscape and Visual 44

9.3.3 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) 35 12.1 Introduction 44

9.3.4 Ramsar Sites 36 12.2 Landform 44

9.3.5 Local Nature Reserves (LNR) 36 12.3 Visual 44

9.3.6 Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) 36 12.3.1 Views into the site 44

9.4 Key Habitat Features 37 12.3.2 Views within the site 46

9.5 Protected or Notable Species 37 12.3.3 Views from the site 46

9.6 Implications for Site Development: Ecology 37

Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon
October 2008 Site Appraisal Report
Page 6 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited

Buro Happold

12.4 Sensitive Visual Receptors 46 15.9 Telecommunications 54

12.5 Implications for Site Development: Visual 46 15.10 Implications for Site Development: Telecommunications 54

13 Noise and Vibration 47 15.11 Oil/ Fuel 54

13.1 Introduction 47 15.12 Implications for Site Development: Oil/ Fuel 55

13.2 Baseline Conditions 47 16 Conclusions and Recommendations 57

13.3 Planning Policy Guidance note 24, Planning and noise 47 References

13.4 Assessment 47
Appendix A: Site Photos
13.5 Construction Impacts 48
Appendix B: Envirocheck Maps & Historical Mapping
13.6 Implications for Site Development 48
Appendix C: Socio-Economic Data
14 Air Quality 49
Appendix D: Summary of Legal Protection of British Plants and Animals and Protected/ Notable
14.1 Introduction 49
Species Records
14.2 Air Quality Objectives 49
Appendix E: Archaeological Data
14.3 Pollution from Roads 51
Appendix F: PPG24 Planning and Noise
14.4 Other Air Quality Issues 52
Appendix G: Utility Plans
14.5 Implications for Site Development – Air Quality 52

15 Utilities 53

15.1 Electricity 53

15.2 Implications for Site Development: Electricity 53

15.3 Gas 53

15.4 Implications for Site Development: Gas 53

15.5 Water 53

15.6 Implications for Site Development: Water 53

15.7 Sewerage and Drainage 53

15.8 Implications for Site Development: Sewerage and Drainage 54


Buro Happold

1 Executive Summary Topic Key Benefits Section Reference

Landscape and The site is not located in or in close proximity to Section 12 Landscape and
1.1 Introduction
Visual significant landscape designations. Residential Visual
European Property Ventures (South Hampshire) Ltd. commissioned Buro Happold in July 2008 to conduct a site
development already exists to the south and east of
appraisal for land off Portsmouth Road in Bursledon. The purpose of this report is to assist in identifying the
the site.
strategy to be pursued and issues to be addressed in the promotion of the site in order to secure its allocation
for development in the local development framework. This section provides a summary of the key issues Noise and Construction of the new development is unlikely to Section 13.4 Assessment
identified that may influence development and provide a baseline for further detailed studies. Vibration cause noise and vibration issues to nearby residents Section 13.6 Implications for
because of the relatively low intensity and short term Site Development
1.2 Key Benefits
nature of construction activity for any development.
The key benefits of locating a residential scheme in this location include:
Mitigation measures are unlikely to be required to
Topic Key Benefits Section Reference protect the site from road traffic noise from either
Portsmouth Road or Hamble Lane.
Socio-economic Bursledon has relatively good levels of socio- Section 5.2 Socio-Economic
and Community economic indicators, with good levels of employment, Conditions Utilities Electricity, gas, potable water, sewerage and Section 15 Utilities
reducing crime rates, and a number of public facilities drainage and telecommunication services are in the
Section 5.4 Location of Public
such as schools and doctors within ease of reach. vicinity of the site and it is likely that they can be
Facilities
utilised/ upgraded to supply the proposed

Water Resources The site is not at risk from fluvial flooding from the Section 7.2 Groundwater development.

adjacent watercourses, nor is the site located in a Section 7.4 Fluvial Flood Risk
source protection zone (due to high permeability soils
sustainable drainage systems and petrol interceptors
are recommended).

Ecology The site is not covered by any statutory or non- Section 9.3 Designated Sites
statutory designations for nature conservation.

Built Heritage No known archaeological records exist for the site Section 10.2 Archaeology
and Archaeology itself.

Traffic and The site has good potential links to Portsmouth Road Section 11.6 Site Access
Transport and/or Hamble Lane


Buro Happold

1.3 Key Issues
development.
The key issues of locating a residential scheme in this location include:
Contaminated The potential risks related to migration of landfill Section 8.3 Implications for
Topic Key Issues Section Reference Land, Geology and gas on to site from the nearby landfill are assessed Site Development and
Soils as Moderate, reflecting the sensitivity and Recommendations
Planning Policies Site is in an area designated as countryside and a Section 4.7 Countryside
proximity of the potential hazard.
and Land Use strategic gap. However the emerging RSS core
Section 4.9 Strategic Gap
strategy has identified gaps as constraints to A preliminary risk assessment, based on a detailed
sustainable development and as such recommends Section 4.10.4 Affordable desk study and geo-environmental investigation
frequent review of the gap boundaries. Housing with regards to contamination, should be

Section 4.8 Agricultural Land conducted prior to detailed design should a
As detailed in the local plan, the provision of 35%
Classification sensitive land use such as housing be proposed for
affordable housing is required for sites with the
the site.
capacity to accommodate 15 or more dwellings.
At the appropriate time, a geo-environmental site
The land is Agricultural Land Class 3, further
investigation should be carried out in conjunction
research is required to determine whether it is
with the geotechnical investigation which will be
Class 3a or 3b, if the former then it would fall within
necessary to collect data on ground conditions
the Local Plan agricultural protection policies.

Ecology If legally protected or notable species or habitats Section 9.5 Protected or
Socio-economic The closest A&E hospital is relatively far from the Section 5.4 Location of Public
are found on site, the proposed development Notable Species
and Community site – 14km. Facilities
would need to be designed to avoid any potential
Section 9.6.2 Further
adverse impact. Further ecological assessments
Water Resources As the site footprint is greater than 1 hectare a Section 7.2 Groundwater Assessment Requirements
are recommended to fully assess the ecological
surface water drainage strategy and further
Section 7.4 Fluvial Flood Risk value of the site and any implications of the site.
consultation with the Environment Agency will be
Section 7.5 Surface Water
required as part of the planning application to
Flooding Built Heritage and A number of archaeological finds are recorded near Section 10.2 Archaeology
address flooding issues, in line with Planning Policy
Archaeology the site, and a survey is likely to be required as a
Statement 25. Section 10.4 Implications for
condition of any planning application with a
Site Development
The site overlies a minor aquifer of high/ watching brief during any works
intermediate permeability.
Traffic and Multiple accesses to the site will need to be Section 11.6 Site Access
The site is upstream of a SINC (site of importance
Transport created, and these will require negotiations with
for nature conservation) and appropriate measures
neighbouring owners and consultations with the
to prevent pollution of this feature may be required
authorities.
during construction and use of any new


Buro Happold

Landscape and Several existing houses overlook the site, and its Section 12.3.1 Views into the
visual development is likely to be perceived as an erosion site
of the strategic gap between Bursledon and
Southampton.

Air quality In order to determine whether or not increased Section 14.5 Implications for
traffic on Hamble Lane would cause further Site Development – Air Quality
deterioration of air quality due to high NO2 levels,
further analysis of more recent monitoring results,
along with the possibility of further monitoring and
modelling to ensure no exceedences are expected
with higher traffic levels is recommended

Utilities A GPSS oil pipeline runs south-north beneath the Section 15.11 Oil/ Fuel
site. In line with Section 16 of the Land Powers
Section 15.12 Implications for
(Defence) Act, a wayleave limits the erection of
Site Development: Oil/ Fuel
buildings within a 3m buffer zone from the edge of
the pipeline. New utilities serving the site may have
to pass beneath the pipeline. An alternative
procedure comprises the diversion of the pipeline
away from the site.


Buro Happold

2 Introduction

European Property Ventures (South Hampshire) Ltd. commissioned Buro Happold in September 2008 to
conduct a site appraisal for land off Shop Lane, Bursledon, in the county of Hampshire.

The purpose of this report is to assist in identifying the strategy to be pursued and issues to be addressed in the
promotion of the site in order to secure its allocation for development in the Local Development Framework.
This report and the accompanying Executive Summary provides European Property Ventures (South
Hampshire) Ltd. with a body of information that can be used to promote the site.

The site appraisal assesses baseline conditions at the site in relation to environmental, infrastructure and social
aspects. A desk based study identified key issues that may influence development in this location, or require
further assessment to ensure that they can be managed through the masterplanning or design process. The
site appraisal process has also identified a number of secondary issues for consideration.

A site visit and desktop study provided baseline information on the site. A number of sources were employed
including an Envirocheck report (relevant planning policies, planning applications and previous land uses),
Groundwise utilities report, species record information requests and various council and government authority
websites, databases and information sources. A full list of data sources is provided in the References Section.
All mapping sources for the site are reproduced throughout the report or provided as Appendices.


Buro Happold

3 Site Description and Land Uses

3.1 Introduction

This site description is based on information gathered from a desk study exercise, an Envirocheck report
(04/09/2008) and a site visit carried out on 08/09/2008. The Envirocheck report provided historical land use
information, data on contamination issues, site sensitivity issues and other factors which may affect the site
such as adjacent land uses.

The site survey was carried out on 08/09/2008 commencing at 11:00am. The weather was generally dull and
overcast, but the prevailing conditions were dry with good visibility.

3.2 Site Location

The site in question is situated on the western developed extent of the village of Bursledon. Bursledon is
located within the borough of Eastleigh, a local government district and borough bordering the unitary authority
of Southampton, the City of Winchester and the borough of Fareham, and is situated on the southern edge of
the county of Hampshire.

The site is bounded to the west by Shop Lane, to the east by a stream/ drainage ditch (running north-south) and
residential properties adjacent to Beverley Gardens and Green Lane and, and to the north by a low hedgerow
and public footpath.

The location of the site in a local, wider and regional context are shown Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-3.

Figure 3-1 Local site context


Buro Happold

Figure 3-3 Regional site context

3.3 Site Description

The vast majority of the 8.6 hectare (21.3 acre) site supports the cultivation of maize standing at approximately
2.5m at the time of the site visit. The base soil consists of a silty texture accompanied with fragments of flint.
Figure 3-2 Wider site context
A patch of wet grassland supporting intermittent rushes is present to the south-east (see Figure 3-4), acting as a
retention/ attenuation store for surface water runoff from the site. A footpath (public right of way) is located
adjacent to the northern site boundary, which is accessed via a stile at the north-east corner, or a footpath gate
at the western corner (see Figure 16-1). Informal footpaths exist along the other boundaries of the site.


Buro Happold

3.4 Adjacent Land Uses

North

The northern site boundary is defined by a low hedgerow (trees and shrubbery) and a formal grassy footpath
(see Figure 3-5). This margin separates the site from a neighbouring agricultural field, again growing maize,
immediately to the north. Two bungalow properties (names: Octavia and Hantonia) accessed from Shop Lane
are adjacent to the north-west corner of the site.

The eastern extent of Sholing, a suburb on the eastern envelope of the city of Southampton is defined by Botley
Road located 700m to the north-west of the site, comprising primarily residential properties.

West

The site is bordered to the west by Shop Lane, a rural lane connecting Portsmouth Road to the south and
Botley Road to the north.
Figure 3-4 View southward along eastern site boundary, wet grassland in foreground and maize to the
The land immediately west of the site comprises a large house, surrounding pasture, and a large shed (see
right
Figure 3-6). Further west, to the north of Portsmouth Road, are a number of open agricultural fields, an isolated
collection of residential buildings, and a sports playing fields. A disused camp-site ground enclosing Burrows
Copse is situated to the west on the southern edge of Portsmouth Road.

Figure 3-5 Footpath along northern site boundary, low hedgerow to the left

Figure 3-6 Old Netley Dairy Farm


Buro Happold

South 3.5 Historical Land Use

Portsmouth Road runs east-west just to the south of the site. The Plough Public House and accompanying Former land uses of the site and surrounding area were identified by studying historical Ordnance Survey maps

grounds are located on the southern verge of Portsmouth Road, as shown in Figure 3-7. (1870 – 2008) presented in the Envirocheck report. The information is summarised in Table 3—1, and a copy of
the maps are available in Appendix B.

The site

In the earliest available map, 1898, the site is shown to be empty with a footpath running along the northern
boundary – no changes to the site itself are shown in mapping between 1898 and the present date.

The surrounding area

In 1870 the area surrounding the site was occupied by undeveloped land, including open fields, common land
(Netley and Bursledon Commons are located to the north) and areas of woodland (Pilands Wood to the south-
east). Netley Farm and outbuildings are shown to the west of the site, with a number of residential properties
lining Grange Road immediately to the north. The Plough Public House (PH) fronts Portsmouth Road directly to
the south of the site.

Figure 3-7 Portsmouth Road and the Plough PH In 1898 mapping a cluster of buildings (presumably residential), including the Manor House PH are first shown
at Netley Green to the south-east at the Portsmouth Road/ Green Lane junction. A collection of buildings are
The wider south-western region comprises agricultural land. A series of lakes follow the route of the drainage
also shown at Lowford Bottom approximately 1km to the east along Portsmouth Road. Quarrying was
ditches through the neighbouring land, following the narrow band of Priors Hill Copse to the south. The urban
commonplace and indicated by a number of gravel pits in the area, including one to the north of the site
settlement, dominated with residential housing extends south-west from the site.
towards the end of Green Lane.
East
By 1909 the collection of buildings in Lowford had expanded. New residential properties were shown along the
The garden plots of houses lining Beverley Gardens and Green Lane follow the eastern boundary of the site. southern end of Green Lane adjacent to the site and along Hamble Lane to the east.
Beverley Gardens comprises detached bungalow units, while Green Lane has two large detached properties
In 1938, a large area of development was apparent to 1.0km north-west of the site on Netley Common.
neighbouring the site boundary. A series of two-storey flats also overlook the site at the western end of
Historical mapping also highlights a sewage works and brick works directly south of the site adjacent to
Wheelers Meadow, a small residential road branching off Green Lane.
Portsmouth Road.
Directly west of Green Lane lies a further agricultural field of maize, and north of this, an open field with
From 1938 onwards, the areas of Lowford and the west of Netley Common experienced extensive growth in
vehicular tracks used to host Sunday car boot sales, defined to the east by Hamble Lane. Past Hamble Lane is
residential properties and residential estates; the open fields adjacent to the site to the north, east and south
Old Netley, merging into the residential area of Lowford. A large Tesco superstore is present to the north of
remained undeveloped.
these settlements adjacent to Windhover Roundabout.
1968 maps show the introduction of residential development adjacent to the site, including Beverley Gardens
branching from Portsmouth Road to the east of the site, and two bungalow properties, Octavia and Hantonia
neighbouring the north-west corner of the site.


Buro Happold

Historical mapping in 1972 highlights an improvement in regional transport links with the introduction of the
Feature Location First Change Comments
M27 motorway bypassing the site to the north-east, incorporating a junction link to a new large roundabout
shown
(Windhover Roundabout) disconnecting Province Hill and Bursledon Road. The improvement in the local and
regional transport network was accompanied by the introduction of the Tesco superstore and petrol station to
Large-scale Lowford and Netley 1938 None -
the north of Hamble Lane, built prior to 1989.
development Common onwards

Feature Location First Change Comments
Residential development Beverley Gardens adjacent 1968 None -
shown
to eastern site boundary

Netley Farm and Immediately south on 1870 None Now referred to as
Octavia and Hantonia Neighbouring westerly 1968 None -
outbuildings Grange Road Old Netley Dairy
bungalows corner of the site
Farm

M27 Motorway 1.0km to the north-east 1972 None -
The Plough PH Immediately south on 1870 None -
Portsmouth Road Windhover Roundabout 600m to the north-east 1972 None -

The Manor House PH Immediately south on 1898 None - Tesco Superstore 450m to the north-east 1989 None -
Portsmouth Road

Table 3—1 Historical land uses
Residential development Netley Green to the south- 1898 None Expanded
east on Portsmouth Road/
Green Lane junction.

Residential development Lowford Bottom 1km to the 1898 None Expanded
east on Portsmouth Road

Gravel Pits Many locations in local 1898 None Indication of
vicinity quarrying in the area

Residential development Southern end of Green 1909 None -
Lane and on Hamble Lane

Large-scale West of Netley Common, 1938 None Expansion
development 1.0km to north-west.


Buro Happold

4 Planning Policy and Land Use
Regional Planning Guidance for the
South East (RPG 9) 2001 - 2016

4.1 Introduction

This section describes the planning policy framework relevant to the site and identifies how planning policies
Hampshire Structure Plan
could influence site development for residential and commercial purposes. Transport planning policies are 1996 - 2011
addressed in Section 11 Traffic and Transport

4.2 Current Planning Instruments

Current planning instruments in force comprise: Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review Hampshire, Portsmouth &
2001-2011
Southampton Minerals & Waste
• Regional Panning Guidance for the South East (RPG 9) (2001 – 2016). The primary purpose of the
Local Plan 1998
document is to provide a regional framework for the preparation of unitary authority Structure Plans.

• Hampshire Structure Plan (1996 – 2011). This document sets out a county level strategic planning
Figure 4-1 Current planning instruments
framework which addresses the broad context for new development and aims to guide the preparation of
Local Plans. The Plan was adopted in March 2000. As a consequence of changes to the planning 4.3 Proposed Planning Instruments
system, the Hampshire County Structure Plan ceased to have any effect from 27/07/2007 with the Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, all Regional Planning Guidance documents, County
exception of 24 policies. Those 24 policies remain in force due to a Direction issued by the Secretary of Structure Plans and Local Development Plans are to be replaced with Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) and
State for Communities and Local Government Local Development Frameworks (LDF).

• Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001-2011). The Local Plan sets out detailed policies and specific
4.4 Regional Spatial Strategy
proposals for the development and use of land in the region. It is the main policy document referred to
The RSS for the South East of England, the South East Plan, is currently being prepared by the South East
by the local planning authority when determining planning applications. The Plan was adopted in May
Regional Assembly. The draft South East Plan Part 1 entitled ‘Core Regional Policies’ was submitted to the
2006.
government in July 2005. County, district and unitary councils submitted the results of the consultation on
local, district and sub-regional housing densities to the Regional Assembly in December 2005. The full Plan
was submitted for consultation in March – June 2006, with a panel report published in August 2007. In July
2008 Government published the changes it intends to make to the Plan, taking into account the Panel’s
recommendations. Comments on these proposals will be received until 24th October 2008. The intention is to
publish the final South East Plan in late 2008 or early 2009 which will guide the preparation of the Core Strategy
of the Eastleigh Local Development Framework.

4.5 Local Development Framework

The Eastleigh Local Development Framework (LDF) is currently in development. The key elements of the LDF
are the Local Development Documents (LDDs), comprising Development Plan Documents (DPDs) and
Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs). The DPDs are the Core Strategy, Development Control Policies,


Buro Happold

Central Area Action Plan, and Site Allocations and Designations. The SPDs elaborate on the policies and Policy Description
proposals outlined in the Core Strategy.
1.CO Planning permission will not be granted for development outside the urban
The Core Strategy provides the context within which other parts of the LDF will be prepared and will set out the edge unless:
vision for the region. The Core Strategy will also set out the key objectives and strategic planning policies for
i. it is necessary for agricultural, forestry or horticultural purposes and a
Eastleigh and will be the primary document considered when determining planning applications. The LDF
countryside location is required; or
Issues Consultation Paper was completed in September 2008.
ii. it is for an outdoor recreational use or is genuinely required as ancillary to
The early stakeholder engagement period for the Housing and Employment Site Specific Allocations DPD is
such a use and does not require the provision of buildings, hardstanding or
proposed to be October 2008 to March 2009 (according to the timetable adopted in July 2007).
structures which, are of a form, scale or design which would demonstrably
harm the character of the locality; or
Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East
(South East Plan) iii. it is essential for the provision of a public utility service or the appropriate
extension of an existing education or health facility and it cannot be located
within the urban edge; or
Eastleigh Local Development Framework
iv. it meets the criteria in the other policies of this Plan.

The extension of private gardens into the countryside will not be permitted.

The Core Strategy and Statement of Community 2.CO Planning permission will not be granted for development which would physically
Policies Development Plan Involvement or visually diminish a strategic gap as identified on the proposals map.

4.CO Development proposals which would cause the permanent loss of the best and
Local Development Scheme Sustainability Appraisal
most versatile agricultural land will not be permitted (Grades 1, 2 and 3a in the
MAFF Agricultural Land Classification system) unless it can be demonstrated to
Supplementary Planning Hampshire Minerals and Waste
Guidance Documents Development Framework the satisfaction of the Borough Council that there are no appropriate
alternatives and there are over-riding sustainability benefits.

18.CO Development which fails to respect, or has an adverse impact on the intrinsic
Figure 4-2 Proposed planning instruments
character of the landscape, will be refused.
Until the South East Plan and Eastleigh LDF Core Strategy have been adopted, planning decisions will still be
19.CO Development in the countryside or in urban areas will be refused if it would
made with regards to the current planning instruments as outlined in Figure 4-1.
result in the loss of or damage to locally important features in the landscape,
4.6 Local Plan such as water courses, ponds and lakes. Where the Council is satisfied that the
The site location is designated as countryside and is located in a designated strategic gap in the Local Plan loss or reduction of a feature is fully justified, it will require appropriate
Review Proposals Map. A summary of relevant Local Plan policies that are considered relevant to the site for replacement features to be included in the proposals.
future residential and commercial use is provided in Table 4—1. Note that some of the policies have been
abbreviated; please refer to the Local Plan Review for the definitive text.


Buro Happold

Policy Description Policy Description

23.NC Development which is likely to have a direct or indirect adverse affect on a Site 34.ES Planning permission will only be granted for proposals which make an
of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) will not be permitted, unless it appropriate contribution towards the Government’s target to reduce levels of
can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Borough Council that the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by:
benefits of the development clearly outweigh the need to safeguard the nature
i. ensuring the use of the most sustainable construction materials and
conservation value of the site. If development is to be permitted, the Council
construction methods;
will require appropriate measures to be taken to mitigate for the adverse effects
on the SINC. ii. minimising the energy demands associated with the occupation of the
development by using energy efficient equipment and incorporating high levels
24.NC Development will not be permitted where it would adversely affect species or
of insulation; and
habitats which are protected by legislation, unless appropriate measures are
proposed which would acceptably mitigate the impact on those species. iii. maximising the proportion of energy that is generated from renewable
sources.
25.NC Development which will adversely affect a habitat or feature of importance for
wild fauna and flora will not be permitted, unless it can be demonstrated to the 45.ES Development proposals must incorporate adequate measures for the disposal

satisfaction of the Council that: of surface water from the development including, where practicable, source
control techniques and sustainable drainage systems, incorporating defined
i. the benefits of the development outweigh the adverse impacts;
arrangements for the future maintenance of the system.
ii. the adverse impacts are unavoidable, and
71.H The Council will encourage mixed use developments where appropriate and will
iii. appropriate measures are taken which would mitigate or compensate for any consider the need for a mix of uses on a site by site basis with the objectives of
adverse impact. reducing the need to travel and introducing vitality into urban areas.

26.NC Development proposals will be required to include measures to enhance the 73.H Housing proposals for 15 dwellings or more will be required to provide
value of features and habitats of nature conservation importance where appropriate mix of dwelling types.
reasonable opportunities exist in connection with the development.

28.ES Provision should be made in the design and layout of housing developments for
the storage and collection of domestic waste and recyclable materials. These
facilities must be sited in locations that would not give rise to disturbance to the
occupiers of residential property.

32.ES Proposals for uses which may generate air, land or water pollution will only be
permitted if the Borough Council is satisfied that they have been designed to
control their impact to an acceptable level.


Buro Happold

Policy Description Policy Description

74.H Affordable housing: To secure the provision of affordable housing, the Borough 168.LB Planning applications for development affecting a site where there is evidence
Council will seek to ensure all of the following: that archaeological remains may exist but whose extent and importance are
unknown, will only be permitted if the developer arranges for an appropriate
i. that a target of 35% of the new dwellings provided on sites which meet the
level of evaluation to be carried out.
other criteria set out below are affordable;
190.IN Proposals for development will only be permitted where adequate services and
ii. that affordable dwellings are provided on all sites capable of accommodating
infrastructure are available or suitable arrangements can be made for their
15 or more dwellings and in special circumstances that affordable dwellings are
provision.
provided on smaller sites, these circumstances are:-
191.IN Appropriate proposals for development will be permitted provided that the
a) where sites are located in parts of the Borough with the highest level of
developer has made arrangements for the provision of the infrastructure,
need for affordable housing, or
services, facilities and amenities directly made necessary by the development
b) where the location is particularly sustainable in respect of proximity to
or has made arrangements to contribute towards the early improvement of
shops, schools, community facilities and good public transport, or
existing infrastructure, services, facilities and amenities, the need for which will
c) where the number of sites for 15 or more dwellings that come forward increase as a direct result of the development proposed
is likely to be limited in a particular area of the Borough.

iii. a mix of types of affordable dwellings; and Table 4—1Relevant planning policies from the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review

iv. that the affordable elements are integrated with the whole development. 4.7 Countryside

100.T Appropriate proposals for development will be permitted provided that the As outlined in the Local Plan Review, the protection and enhancement of the countryside within the borough is

developer has made arrangements for the provision of the infrastructure, a key objective of the council for reasons including agricultural protection, landscape value, providing a setting

services, facilities and amenities directly made necessary by the development for towns and villages and for nature conservation. The plan recognises that allowance for genuine

or has made arrangements to contribute towards the early improvement of development needs should be accommodated. The site in question is designated in the local plan proposals

existing infrastructure, services, facilities and amenities, the need for which will map as an area of countryside. Development is constrained in countryside designations under Policy 1.CO of

increase as a direct result of the development proposed the local plan (see Table 4—1).

114.OS The Borough Council will require, in connection with new residential 4.8 Agricultural Land Classification
developments, the minimum provision of 2.85 hectares of public open space The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) (now the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
per 1,000 population. Affairs) Agricultural Land Classification System (ALC) classifies agricultural land into five grades of quality; grade
one being the best quality and grade five being the poorest quality. As detailed in Policy 4.CO of the Eastleigh
166.LB Development which would destroy or damage, directly or indirectly, a
Borough Local Plan Review, the council seeks to protect the most versatile agricultural land, classed as grades
scheduled ancient monument or other nationally important monument, or
1, 2 and 3a in the ALC system, unless there are over-riding sustainability advantages. The site in question is
adversely affect their settings, will be refused.
located in a grade 3 zone. The ALC system sub-divides grade 3 into sub-grades 3a and 3b, being ‘good’ and


Buro Happold

‘moderate’ quality respectively. In order to determine the sub-classification of the grade 3 land, further 4.10.2 Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review
consultation with the local authority and potential surveying of the site is required.
The housing provision in Eastleigh is based on figures published in the Second Deposit Plan, recommendations

4.9 Strategic Gap provided by the local plan inquiry inspector in 2004/ 2005, and consideration of conformity with provisions
outlined in the Hampshire Structure Plan.
Strategic gaps comprise an area of land between settlements, which perform the function of protecting the
individual identity of those settlements. The Hampshire Structure Plan highlights two strategic gaps in the
Policy 70.H
borough, one of them comprising Southampton-Bursledon. The local plan proposal map locates the site in this
strategic gap. Policy 2.CO of the local plan limits development which would “physically or visually diminish a The Council will make the following provision for new housing in the period September 2001 to March

strategic gap”. 2011, as follows: Baseline: 5608 dwellings; Reserve: 395 dwellings. In order to be in general conformity

with the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Review).
Eastleigh Borough Local Plan: Bursledon – Southampton Strategic Gap
Source: Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001 – 2011)
This strategic gap is comparatively narrow and its boundaries are formed by the urban edges of Hedge
The key points to note from the housing provision provided in the local plan are:
End, West End, Thornhill, Bursledon and Netley Abbey. The significance of the gap can be appreciated
• The local plan identifies 1,700 dwellings more than the baseline requirement outlined in the structure plan
from several locations including the M27, St Johns Road, the A334, Upper Northam Close/Drive, Botley

Road, Tollbar Way, Grange Road, Moorgreen Road, Kanes Hill, Portsmouth Road, Woolston Road, • The local plan is 700 dwellings short of the reserve requirement provided in the structure plan

Abbey Hill and Grange Road. • The local plan has met the full reserve requirement set out by the local plan inquiry inspector with an
additional margin of 300 dwellings.
Source: Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001 – 2011)
4.10.3 The South East Plan
The Panel Report on the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East Plan highlights the importance of strategic
gaps to perform a settlement-shaping role, and public support behind existing strategic gap policies. However, The paragraphs below provide a summary of key policies with regards to housing provision and the

the report further notes that gap polices are often used “in an inflexible way, as long-term restraints on recommended amendments to these policies by the Panel of Inspectors.

opportunities for sustainable development in urban fringe locations” and as such, the report recommends the The South East Plan requires an annual average housing provision of 28,900 additional dwellings throughout the
review of existing strategic gap policies in Hampshire. region between 2006 and 2026. For the district of Eastleigh, an annual housing provision of 384 dwellings

4.10 Housing Allocation between 2006 and 2026 is suggested.

4.10.1 Hampshire County Council With regards to the location of new housing, the South East Plan requires that at least 60% of housing is to be
provided on previously developed land. The Panel’s report suggests that the most sustainable solution for
The key housing objectives of Hampshire County Council are:
some sub-regions may be the use of selected sites located within the Green Belt, although Local Authorities
• Create or maintain mixed and balanced communities may face extensive local resistance.

• Address all sections of the community, including those in need of affordable housing (see Section 4.10.4)
4.10.4 Affordable Housing
• Accommodate as many dwelling as possible within existing built up areas or on land committed for Planning Policy and Guidance 3 (PPG3) recognises the government’s requirement for consideration of
development affordable housing provision in planning applications.


Buro Happold

Affordable housing is defined in the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan as: “housing the cost of which is significantly 4.11 Implications for development – Planning Policies
lower than average for the type of property on the open market locally, such that it can be afforded by In accordance with current planning guidance, the following factors will require further investigation:
households below the income threshold where the cost of housing would be in excess of 25% of gross
• The site is located in a designated area of countryside in the Eastleigh Local Plan, and there is a
household income.” presumption against further development under current local plan policies.

The local plan notes that house prices in the Eastleigh borough are high, making it difficult for many households • The site is located in a strategic and local gap which are protected under 2.CO and 3.CO in the Eastleigh
to purchase on the open market. The council conducted a Housing Needs Survey (revised 2004) which Local Plan; however progression of the emerging RSS core strategy has identified constraints to
identified the requirement for additional affordable housing. The survey determined an annual building sustainable development and as such recommends frequent review of the green belt/ gap boundaries.
requirement of 672 affordable homes to meet a backlog and targets set out for the 2011 period.
• Further consultation and possible surveying is required to identify the MAFF ALC grade 3 subcategory in
The council will seek affordable housing on sites accommodating fifteen residential dwellings or more (sites of order to establish whether Policy 4.CO of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review applies.
0.5 hectares or more) as justified by figures presented in the Housing Needs Survey. Affordable housing must
• As detailed in the local plan, the provision of 35% affordable housing is required for sites with the
be integrated within the overall development, ideally in a series of small clusters.
capacity to accommodate 15 or more dwellings.
As set out in policy 74.H (Table 4—1) the site should aim to provide a 35% proportion of a mix of types of
affordable dwellings.

The draft South East Plan states that Local Plans should have regard to the overall regional target that 25% of
all new housing should be social rented accommodation and 10% should comprise other forms of affordable
housing. The South East Plan also states that in rural areas, Local Development Documents should promote
small scale affordable housing sites within settlements, possibly including land which would not otherwise be
released for development.

The Eastleigh Borough Council LDF Issues Consultation Paper (Core Strategy) reflects the opinion held in the
local plan that house prices are high. The paper identifies that affordable housing is often provided through new
development, with developers required to provide a defined percentage on new residential sites as outlined in
the local plan. The paper notes that an Affordable Housing Economic Study is currently being compiled to test
the proportion of affordable housing that can be realistically be provided on new residential development sites
in Eastleigh.

Issue 6: Increase the numbers of affordable homes

The need for affordable housing in the borough is very substantial. It is usually provided as a

proportion of new development, or by financial contribution from new development; other means of

provision include buying into existing stock (which is expensive).

Source: Eastleigh Borough LDF: Issues Consultation Paper


Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report

Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

More from CRAIG BRITS

More from CRAIG BRITS (13)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report