Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Bursledon Buro Happold Site Appraisal Report

1,184

Published on

Published in: Real Estate, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,184
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 024601 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon01October 2008Revision 01
  • 2. 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 TCsrv-london02Project Filing024601 - Site Appraisals Houghton Regis and StroudF39EnvironmentBursledonReports081031 Final report081031 RO 024601 Site Appraisal Report 01.doc author Richard Orriss signature date 31/10/2008 approved Trevor Curson signature date 31/10/2008Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 3 of 73
  • 3. Buro Happold 4.10 Housing Allocation 23 4.10.1 Hampshire County Council 23Contents 4.10.2 Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review 23 4.10.3 The South East Plan 231 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 252 Introduction 13 5.2 Socio-Economic Conditions 253 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 264 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 23Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 5 of 73
  • 4. 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 398 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 429 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 37Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 6 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 5. 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 5413 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 Data14 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 5215 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 54Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 7 of 73
  • 6. Buro Happold1 Executive Summary Topic Key Benefits Section Reference Landscape and The site is not located in or in close proximity to Section 12 Landscape and1.1 Introduction Visual significant landscape designations. Residential VisualEuropean Property Ventures (South Hampshire) Ltd. commissioned Buro Happold in July 2008 to conduct a site development already exists to the south and east ofappraisal 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 allocationfor 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 Assessmentidentified 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 Development1.2 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 LaneSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 9 of 73
  • 7. Buro Happold1.3 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 newRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 10 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 8. 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.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 11 of 73
  • 9. Buro Happold2 IntroductionEuropean Property Ventures (South Hampshire) Ltd. commissioned Buro Happold in September 2008 toconduct 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 thepromotion 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 (SouthHampshire) 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 socialaspects. A desk based study identified key issues that may influence development in this location, or requirefurther assessment to ensure that they can be managed through the masterplanning or design process. Thesite 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 employedincluding an Envirocheck report (relevant planning policies, planning applications and previous land uses),Groundwise utilities report, species record information requests and various council and government authoritywebsites, 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.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 13 of 73
  • 10. Buro Happold3 Site Description and Land Uses3.1 IntroductionThis 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 useinformation, data on contamination issues, site sensitivity issues and other factors which may affect the sitesuch as adjacent land uses.The site survey was carried out on 08/09/2008 commencing at 11:00am. The weather was generally dull andovercast, but the prevailing conditions were dry with good visibility.3.2 Site LocationThe site in question is situated on the western developed extent of the village of Bursledon. Bursledon islocated within the borough of Eastleigh, a local government district and borough bordering the unitary authorityof Southampton, the City of Winchester and the borough of Fareham, and is situated on the southern edge ofthe county of Hampshire.The site is bounded to the west by Shop Lane, to the east by a stream/ drainage ditch (running north-south) andresidential properties adjacent to Beverley Gardens and Green Lane and, and to the north by a low hedgerowand 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 contextRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 14 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 11. 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.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 15 of 73
  • 12. 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 (seeright 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 FarmRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 16 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 13. Buro HappoldSouth 3.5 Historical Land UsePortsmouth 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 mapsgrounds 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 areThe 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 wasditches 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 sitesettlement, 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 theThe 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 toWheelers 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 invehicular 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 southOld 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.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 17 of 73
  • 14. Buro HappoldHistorical mapping in 1972 highlights an improvement in regional transport links with the introduction of the Feature Location First Change CommentsM27 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 andregional 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.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 18 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 15. Buro Happold4 Planning Policy and Land Use Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG 9) 2001 - 20164.1 IntroductionThis section describes the planning policy framework relevant to the site and identifies how planning policies Hampshire Structure Plancould influence site development for residential and commercial purposes. Transport planning policies are 1996 - 2011addressed in Section 11 Traffic and Transport4.2 Current Planning InstrumentsCurrent 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,Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 19 of 73
  • 16. Buro HappoldCentral Area Action Plan, and Site Allocations and Designations. The SPDs elaborate on the policies and Policy Descriptionproposals outlined in the Core Strategy. 1.CO Planning permission will not be granted for development outside the urbanThe 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 aEastleigh and will be the primary document considered when determining planning applications. The LDF countryside location is required; orIssues Consultation Paper was completed in September 2008. ii. it is for an outdoor recreational use or is genuinely required as ancillary toThe 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 orproposed 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 intrinsicFigure 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 wouldmade 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 theThe 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 appropriateReview 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 beenabbreviated; please refer to the Local Plan Review for the definitive text.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 20 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 17. 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.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 21 of 73
  • 18. 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’ andRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 22 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 19. 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 Reviewconsultation 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, recommendations4.9 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 theindividual identity of those settlements. The Hampshire Structure Plan highlights two strategic gaps in the Policy 70.Hborough, one of them comprising Southampton-Bursledon. The local plan proposal map locates the site in thisstrategic 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 Marchstrategic 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 PlanThe Panel Report on the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East Plan highlights the importance of strategicgaps 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 thethe 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 thereview of existing strategic gap policies in Hampshire. region between 2006 and 2026. For the district of Eastleigh, an annual housing provision of 384 dwellings4.10 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 forThe 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.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 23 of 73
  • 20. Buro HappoldAffordable housing is defined in the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan as: “housing the cost of which is significantly 4.11 Implications for development – Planning Policieslower 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 ahousehold 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 Eastleighto 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 toidentified 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 inThe 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 thebe 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 ofaffordable dwellings.The draft South East Plan states that Local Plans should have regard to the overall regional target that 25% ofall new housing should be social rented accommodation and 10% should comprise other forms of affordablehousing. The South East Plan also states that in rural areas, Local Development Documents should promotesmall scale affordable housing sites within settlements, possibly including land which would not otherwise bereleased for development.The Eastleigh Borough Council LDF Issues Consultation Paper (Core Strategy) reflects the opinion held in thelocal plan that house prices are high. The paper identifies that affordable housing is often provided through newdevelopment, with developers required to provide a defined percentage on new residential sites as outlined inthe local plan. The paper notes that an Affordable Housing Economic Study is currently being compiled to testthe proportion of affordable housing that can be realistically be provided on new residential development sitesin 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 PaperRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 24 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 21. Buro Happold responsible for tackling these issues, fronted by a Strategic Steering Group comprising representatives from the5 Socio-Economic and Community borough and county councils, community services, youth offending teams and fire and police authorities. The Eastleigh Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy has developed a series of objectives to address the5.1 Introduction specific priorities set out in Eastleigh Borough Councils audit of crime and disorder to reduce crime, disorder,This section provides an overall summary of the socio-economic conditions in the Bursledon and Old Netley anti-social behaviour and drugs and substance misuse.Ward and provides a comparison to Eastleigh and South East England. 5.3 Community InvolvementA summary of active community and interest groups and information on public facilities for the local area isprovided to enable European Property Ventures (South Hampshire) Ltd. to understand the potential level of A search of the Eastleigh Borough Council website revealed many active community groups, organisations andcommunity interest in the site and the locality. facilities in the vicinity of the site. Examples of these are: • A number of community centres are present in Bursledon including the Bursledon Community Centre and5.2 Socio-Economic Conditions the Bursledon Village HallThe figures below have been taken from the Census 2001 Key Statistics. • Bursledon Community Centre offers Yoga and Pilates classes5.2.1 Population • The Pilands Wood Centre provides activities for young and old including computer drop-in sessions,The site is located in the Bursledon and Old Netley ward in the borough of Eastleigh. The total population in the dancing, martial arts and photographyBursledon and Old Netley Ward in 2001 was 7,445; the total population of Eastleigh was 116,169. • The Eastleigh Southern Parishes Older Peoples Forum, with a newsletter and open meetingsFull figures for the Ward, Eastleigh and South-East Region are shown in Appendix C. • The Bursledon and District Gardening Club5.2.2 Economic and Occupational StatusThe total percentage of people in employment between the ages of 16-74 is 72.11% for the Bursledon and Old • The Bursledon History GroupNetley Ward, 74.15% for the borough of Eastleigh and 70.22% for the South East England. • The Bursledon Women’s InstituteThe industries in the Bursledon and Old Netley Ward with the highest number of employees are ‘managers and • The Bursledon Arts and Craft Groupsenior officials’ and ‘administrative and secretarial’ occupations, employing 16.08% and 15.05% respectively. 5.4 Location of Public FacilitiesThe most common industry of employment for the ward, Eastleigh and South East England is ‘wholesale andretail trade’, followed by ‘manufacturing’ and ‘real estate, renting and business activities’. The following sections outline the availability of community and public facilities within accessible reach of the development site. Geographical locations of those nearest to the site are presented in Figure 5-1.5.2.3 Personal Safety SchoolsThe Home Office recorded 9,949 counts of criminal activity during the 2007 – 2008 in Eastleigh, equivalent to acrime rate per 1000 population of 83.61. This equates to a crime rate reduction over of the 2006 – 2007 annum A number of primary, secondary and sixth form schools are located within the vicinity of the site.of 5.6 per 1000 population, highlighting an improvement in public safety (Home Office Research Development The closest primary schools to the site are as follows:Statistics website - http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/ia/atlas.html) • Bursledon Junior School (1.0 kilometres), for children aged 7 – 11 years oldA partnership approach has been adopted to reduce crime and disorder, anti-social behaviour and drugs andalcohol misuse within the Borough of Eastleigh. The Eastleigh Borough Community Safety Partnership is • Heathfield Junior School (1.4 kilometres), for children aged 7 – 11 years old • Hightown Primary School (1.5 kilometres), for children aged 4 – 11 years oldSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 25 of 73
  • 22. Buro HappoldThe closest secondary schools to the site are as follows: doctor’s surgery is within easy reach from the site; however the closest hospital with an A&E department is further afield at 14km from the site. • Grove Park Business and Enterprise College (1.5km), for ages 11 – 16 • Hamble Community Sports College (1.9km), for ages 11- 16 • Chamberlayne Park School (2.0km), for ages 11 – 16A number of sixth form colleges are within commutable distance from the site. Those closest are: • Itchen College (2.9km), for ages 16 + • Southampton City College (5.0km), for ages 16 + Grove Park Business andHospitals and Doctor Surgeries Enterprise CollegeThe Bursledon Surgery is located approximately 0.6km from the site at Manor Crescent, Bursledon. Thesurgery has two doctors and other staff including nurses. The surgery is open from 8:30 – 18:30 Monday to TescoFriday. Bursledon BursledonThe nearest NHS hospital (no Accident and Emergency (A&E)) is Coldeast located on Bridge Road, Sarisbury Surgery C. CentreGreen, approximately 6.7km from the site. The closest hospital with an A&E department is SouthamptonGeneral Hospital located 14km from the site in Southampton. NewsagentShopsA number of shops and facilities are located within the vicinity including the following: Manor • Food shops: A large Tesco supermarket is located within walking distance to the north-east of the site. A House PH Bursledon Junior local newsagent is located on Portsmouth Road approximately 1.0km from the site. School • Bursledon Post Office is situated on Portsmouth Road approximately 0.9km from the site. • Four public houses are present within a 1.0km radius, including the Plough pub situated immediately Bursledon Pilands south of the site on Portsmouth Road. Village Hall Wood Centre5.5 Implications for Site Development: Socio-economicThe data presented above indicates that Bursledon is an area with relatively good levels of socio-economicindicators.In comparison to regional statistics, employment levels are high and crime rates reducing. Public facilities aregood, with a number of primary, secondary and sixth form schools located within an accessible proximity. A Figure 5-1 Location of public facilitiesRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 26 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 23. Buro Happold The site is located in Bursledon and Old Netley Ward. The councillors elected from this ward are Tonia Craig,6 Political Overview Steve Holes and Hugh Millar, all of the Liberal Democrat Party.The site in question falls within the county council of Hampshire, the borough council of Eastleigh, and the A map illustrating the ward boundaries in the borough of Eastleigh is shown in Figure 6-1.parish council of Bursledon. The Eastleigh Member of Parliament (MP), Christopher Huhne of the LiberalDemocrat Party represents Eastleigh in the House of Commons. This section provides information on thepolitical composition of each of the councils.6.1 County CouncilHampshire County Council is divided into 78 electoral divisions represented by 78 councillors. Local electionsare held every four years, with the most recent held in May 2005. The results of this election in produced thefollowing democratic composition for the council: Party Number of seats Conservative 46 Liberal Democrat 28 Labour 4The site is located in the county division of Hamble; the Hamble County Councillor is Keith House of the LiberalDemocrat Party.6.2 District CouncilBursledon is represented by the borough council of Eastleigh. Eastleigh Borough Council has 44 councillorsrepresenting 19 wards; the political composition is as follows: Party Number of seats Liberal Democrat 38 Conservative 4 Source: Hampshire County Council (/www3.hants.gov.uk/es/planning/factsandfigures) Labour 2 Figure 6-1 Eastleigh Ward BoundariesSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 27 of 73
  • 24. Buro Happold6.3 Parish CouncilTown and Parish Councils are set up under the Local Government Act 1972 and are an essential part of thestructure of local democracy. Parish Councils provide comment and guidance on planning applications; theirview is taken into account by the planning authority when arriving at planning consent decisions.The site lies within Hound parish council area, represented by ten parish councilors; the chair for the council isDave Palframan and the Clerk is Sue Hobbs.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 28 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 25. Buro Happold7 Water ResourcesThis chapter provides information on surface water features, surface water quality, groundwater and flood riskwithin the vicinity of the site which may influence site development.Hydrological information has been obtained from an Envirocheck report (dated 04 September 2008), theEnvironment Agency, and a site walkover (08 September 2008).7.1 Surface Water FeaturesA drainage ditch, originating 200m north of the site runs parallel along the eastern site boundary north to south.This enables the transfer of surface water runoff from the agricultural land away from the site to prevent pondingof water. The drainage ditch discharges into a patch of bog / wet grassland in the south-eastern corner of thesite; the channel connects with a small stream, Butlocks Heath Stream, diverting surface water southwards intoa series of ponds contained within the ‘Priors Hill Copse/Hound Grove’ and ‘Priors Hill Brickworks’ Sites of Drainage ditch alongImportance for Nature Conservation (SINC) approximately 200m from the site boundary, and eventually into eastern boundarySouthampton Water 2.8km to the south. The site may require pollution intervention measures to prevent a Boggypathway of pollutants to the SINC via the drainage ditch along the eastern boundary. wetland patchThe tidal section of the River Hamble is located 2.0km to the east of the site. The river is known throughout the Butlocks Heath Streamsailing world as ‘the heart of British yachting’ due to a large presence of sailing vessels navigating the water.Southampton Water, a stretch of the sea north of the Isle of Wight and the Solent, is present 2.8km to the southof the site.The Envirocheck Report has classified the Butlocks Heath Stream as Quality B: Good, in line with the PondsEnvironment Agency’s General Quality Assessment Scheme (GQA) for classifying the water quality of rivers.The location of local surface water features is provided in Figure 7-1. Figure 7-1 Location of surface water features (landfill zones shown in red) 7.2 Groundwater Maps obtained from the Envirocheck report show the site to overlie a minor aquifer with high/ intermediate permeability soils, as illustrated in Figure 7-2. A minor aquifer may be capable of supporting groundwaterSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 29 of 73
  • 26. Buro Happoldabstraction on a local level for public potable water supply. The depth of groundwater is unknown at this stage, Maps showing the location of Source Protection Zones (SPZ) for major aquifers used for potable water supplyalthough when considering the close proximity of the River Hamble and Southampton Water, and the relatively have been obtained from the Envirocheck report (see Appendix B).flat nature of the land in this area it is likely that groundwater is relatively shallow. The mapping indicates that the site is not underlain by a SPZ, nor is a SPZ located in the vicinity of the site. Although the site is located outside of a source protection zone, and above a minor aquifer, the soil is of high permeability, allowing for high infiltration rates, and as such the groundwater should be protected. It is recommended that the discharge of surface water runoff from roads and vehicle parking facilities incorporates sustainable drainage systems and petrol interceptors. In accordance with the Envirocheck report, the closest groundwater abstraction point is 1.9km east of the site and is operated by Messrs Game Bros for farming and domestic purposes. There are four recorded surface water abstractions within 2km of the site; the closest is located 420m south and is operated by D. and M. Draper for spray irrigation. 7.3 Flood Risk Guidance 7.3.1 Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25): Development and Flood Risk sets out Government’s national policies on flood risk and is the principal document referred to by planning authorities when preparing strategic plans and assessing individual planning applications. PPS25 requires that a sequential risk-based approach is taken to determine the suitability of land for development in flood risk areas and identify available sites with a lower probability of flooding that would be appropriate for the type of development or land use proposed. If, after following the sequential test, it is not consistent with wider sustainability objectives to locate development in areas with a lower probability of flooding, the exception test can be applied. The exception text provides a method of managing flood risk whilst still allowing necessary development to occur. Within each flood zone, new development should be directed first to areas within the lowest probability of flooding, i.e. at the higher levels of the site. 7.3.2 Eastleigh Borough Local Plan The Eastleigh Borough Local Plan sets out policies relating to development and flood risk. The local plan proposals map locates the development site out of flood plain, permitting all development land uses.Figure 7-2 Groundwater vulnerability 7.3.3 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment High (H) 1, 2, 3, U High (H) 1, 2, 3, U A Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) was compiled in 2006 for the borough of Eastleigh to supplementMajor Aquifer Minor Aquifer Intermediate (I) 1, 2 Intermediate (I) 1, 2 the Eastleigh Borough LDF in accordance with guidance from the EA and the Department for Communities and(Highly Permeable) (Variably Permeable) Low Low Local Government. This document has enabled the Council to identify areas that are considered to be suitable for development based on flood risk.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 30 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 27. Buro HappoldThe SFRA modelled flood plain mapping shows the site in Flood Zone 1 (less than 1 in 1000 annual probabilityof flooding).7.4 Fluvial Flood RiskInformation regarding flood risk has been obtained from the Environment Agency and Envirocheck records. Anindicative flood map showing the extent of flood risk is provided in Appendix B. The indicative flood zonemapping shows the development site to be located within Flood Zone 1 (white area) – flood risk less than the 1in 1000 year return period (i.e. less than 0.1% probability of flooding in any year).Table D.1 in PPS25 defines the flood zones and associated appropriate land use and flood risk assessmentrequirements. In accordance with Table D.1, Flood Zone 1 is potentially suitable for all land uses.The site is therefore not at risk from fluvial flooding. However, PPS25 notes that flood risk should be addressedfor sites exceeding a footprint of one hectare through a Flood Risk Assessment. This should be submittedalongside the planning application.As the drainage ditch/ Butlocks Heath stream are minor watercourses, flood risk is not addressed through EAindicative flood zone mapping. However, at Flood Risk Assessment stage, an analysis of potential fluvialflooding arising from these adjacent watercourses should be addressed.7.5 Surface Water FloodingThe existing site is greenfield in nature, thus minimising surface water runoff. The introduction of developmentwithin the site boundary will undoubtedly increase the percentage impermeable area over current groundsurface conditions. Surface water runoff rates are therefore anticipated to increase due to reduced percolation.The EA will require that the surface water drainage system should not increase the discharge rate above theexisting rate. The system should also be designed to ensure that neither the development nor third parties areat risk of flooding in the 1 in 100 year rainfall/runoff event. The increase in surface water runoff from theproposed development will therefore require attenuation to existing conditions.Surface water flooding from the proposed development should be addressed through a drainage strategy in theFlood Risk Assessment, as discussed in Section 7.4.7.6 Implications for Site DevelopmentAs there are no significant water-bodies in the vicinity of the site, the development has a low risk of fluvialflooding. However, in line with planning guidance for flood risk PPS25, a Surface Water Drainage Strategy willbe required as part of a Flood Risk Assessment to demonstrate how surface water will be controlled on site.The strategy should include the consideration of Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDS) options forsustainable surface water managementSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 31 of 73
  • 28. Buro Happold8 Contaminated Land, Geology and Soils 8.2.1 Potentially Contaminative Activities The contaminants of concern in this risk assessment are based primarily on information from the review of historical information (see Section 2), the results of the walkover survey and reference to DEFRA R&D8.1 Contamination risk assessment Publication CLR 8 ‘Priority contaminants for the assessment of land’ (ref.3). Table 8—1 summarises theAccording to PPS23 Guidelines (ref.1), a possibility of contamination should be assumed when considering principal potential sources of contamination.sensitive land uses such as housing, schools and children’s play areas. PPS23 also goes on to say that landcontamination is a material consideration and that it is the landowner/ developer’s responsibility to: Potential source (likely age) Location Potential contaminants of concern • identify the nature and scale of any contamination on the site and [Envirocheck map id no.] • ensure safe development (i.e. by means of appropriate investigation, risk assessment and remediation).Local Planning Authorities are advised that developers should provide sufficient information to determine the Agricultural activities (>100 years) On site Pesticides, herbicides, nitrates, ammonia,presence, nature and extent of any contamination, the risks it may pose and whether these risks are capable of fuel oils.mitigation to an acceptably low level. PPS23 goes on to recommend a phased approach in accordance with theEnvironment Agency Model Procedures (CLR11, ref.2). This current report presents the information of the first Buried oil pipeline On site Petroleum hydrocarbons.phase of this process, namely a Desk Study (hazard identification and assessment). Historical landfill sites 60m NE [36] Leachate (heavy metals, organics), landfill8.2 Geology, hydrogeology and hydrology gases (methane, carbon dioxide, VOCs). 350m W [56]According to the 1: 50,000 geological map of Southampton (Sheet 315, 1987), the site is underlain by RiverTerrace Deposits followed by the Wittering Formation (~25m thick sand and clay) and the London Clay at depth(~100m thick). The Wittering Formation is present at the surface along the eastern boundary of the site. The Table 8—1 Contamination sourcesgroundwater vulnerability map for South Hampshire and Isle of Wight (Sheet 52, 1996) indicates that the River The historical landfill area 60m NE of the site was previously used to deposit waste including household waste,Terrace Deposits and the Wittering Formation are classified as Minor Aquifers. The London Clay is classified as and broadly coincides with the location of the existing car boot sale site.a Non-Aquifer. Figure 8-1 shows the location of adjacent historical landfill sites marked and licensed waste managementAccording to the Envirocheck report, there are no groundwater abstraction points within 1km of the site. The facilities marked .nearest is 1.9km E and is operated by Messrs Game Bros for general farming and domestic purposes. The siteis not situated within an Environment Agency Source Protection Zone (SPZ). In terms of surface water, ButlocksHeath Stream (Quality B: good) forms the eastern boundary of the site; it runs from north to south west. Thereare four recorded surface water abstractions within 2km of the site. The nearest is located 420m S and isoperated by D. and M. Draper for spray irrigation.According to the British Geological Survey (BGS) data, the area is not affected by radon. There are no groundstability hazards from ground collapse, ground dissolution or compression. The ground stability hazards fromlandslide and running sand are classified as very low. The ground stability hazards from shrinking or swellingclay are classified as moderate.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 32 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 29. Buro Happold south), former gravel pits (450m north east, 450m south west), a former sewage works (250m south) and historical landfill sites (seven between 350m and 950m away from the site). 8.2.2 Receptors and Pathways People (future site users, construction and maintenance workers and casual visitors), controlled waters (Butlocks Heath Stream, groundwater in the Minor Aquifer), the local environment (e.g. animal and plant life) and buildings could be at risk from contamination if present. Any soil contaminants from on site activities can migrate as a free or dissolved phase on/ in the groundwater, as well as via leaching and runoff. Potential migration pathways which may link future site users to the sources identified above include ingestion of soil and dust, dermal contact with soil and dust, and inhalation of dust and vapours. These pathways could be reduced if the majority of the site is covered in hardstanding in the future development. Construction and maintenance workers and site users of adjacent properties could also come into contact with contamination via dermal contact with soil and groundwater and inhalation of dust during construction, respectively. Pathways for plant life typically include root uptake. In terms of buildings, high concentrations of sulphate or sulphur compounds that may potentially be converted into sulphate, as well as chloride can have adverse effects on building materials. 8.2.3 Risks Associated with Potentially Contaminated Land A Preliminary Risk Assessment with respect to ground contamination of the site in Bursledon has been carried out on the basis of the data described above. Source-pathway-receptor linkages have been identified and considered. The results of this risk assessment are summarised below. 8.2.3.1 Potential risks related to on-site land use The potential risks to future site users from soil contamination linked to historical and current on site activities have been assessed as Moderate/ Low. This reflects the potential for future site users to come into contact with contaminated soil and groundwater in gardens and areas of soft landscape (if present). In addition, appropriate investigation and mitigation in the final development is likely (see recommendations below). The potential risks to construction workers from such soil contamination are assessed as Low, reflecting the likely implementation of appropriate health and safety procedures. The risk to controlled waters is assessed as Moderate/ Low, reflecting the likely limited nature and extent of the potential contaminant sources, but also theFigure 8-1 Location of historical landfill sites proximity to the Butlocks Heath Stream and the sensitivity of the controlled water resources in this area (MinorSeveral other activities in the vicinity of the site, located at distances over 100m, were not subject to formal risk Aquifers).assessment in this study, due to their nature and distance from the site. These include a former brickfield (250mSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 33 of 73
  • 30. Buro HappoldThis risk assessment was carried out on the basis of the future site use being residential with gardens. Should • the ground gas regime (particularly in the vicinity of the off-site landfill to the north east).the site be redeveloped with a less sensitive end use such as commercial/ industrial with predominantlyhardstanding, the risks to future site users will be reduced to Low.8.2.3.2 Potential risks related to the oil pipelineThe potential risks related to possible leakage/ loss from the oil pipeline which crosses the site are assessed asVery Low to Low. This reflects the facts that the pipeline is buried at depth (depth unknown), its age andcondition are unknown and any contamination is likely to be relatively localised along its length. The liabilityassociated with any such contamination is likely to be with the pipeline owner/ operator.8.2.3.3 Potential risks related to the off site landfillThe potential risks related to possible migration of landfill gas on to site from the nearby landfill are assessed asModerate. This assessment reflects the sensitivity of the potential hazard, the proximity of the landfill and thenature of the intervening geology.In the event of elevated concentrations of landfill gas being recorded on site, it is the responsibility of thedeveloper to ensure safe development (i.e. to construct the new dwellings with appropriate gas protectionmeasures). However, some element of liability may also fall to the owner of the landfill site and in such an event,specialist legal advice should be sought.8.3 Implications for Site Development and RecommendationsIn accordance with PPS23, risk assessment based on a detailed desk study and geoenvironmental investigationwith regards to contamination should be conducted when a sensitive land use such as housing is proposed onland potentially affected by contamination (especially if soft landscaping is to be included in the design). Suchan investigation will normally include trial pitting and boreholes, and sampling and analysis (of ground, waterand gas) to allow a fully interpretive report to be prepared to accompany a more detailed assessment of thesite’s development potential.It is therefore recommended that at the appropriate time, a geoenvironmental site investigation should becarried out in conjunction with the geotechnical investigation which will be necessary to collect data on groundconditions (and which will also allow foundation and drainage design for any future development).It is recommended that such an investigation should be designed to determine the following: • the nature/ extent of any on-site contamination related to the historic use of the site; • the groundwater and surface water quality; andRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 34 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 31. Buro Happold The following designated sites are located within 2.0km of the site.9 Ecology (flora and fauna) 9.3.1 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)9.1 Introduction The Habitats Directive (as amended) includes lists of 189 habitat types and 788 species for which MemberAn assessment of the baseline ecological conditions, the potential implications for future development and the States must consider designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs).likely requirements for further ecological assessment has been undertaken based on information gathered from • Solent Maritime SAC (approximately 1.75km south-east-east of the site) – 11,240 hectares of SACthe site visit on 08 September 2008 and a desk top study. designation. The sections of the River Hamble that are designated under this SAC are principallyThe desk top study involved the following: saltmarsh habitats dominated by cord grass and mudflats, supporting a large assemblage of invertebrates, crustacean and molluscs, and therefore providing extensive feeding grounds for birds. • Review of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan to identify any relevant designated sites relating to nature conservation policies 9.3.2 Special Protection Areas (SPA) • Review of interactive maps held on Magic www.magic.gov.uk to identify relevant designated sites and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) are strictly protected sites classified in accordance with Article 4 of the EC habitats Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC), also known as the ‘Birds Directive’, which came into force in April 1979. They are designated for rare and vulnerable birds, listed in Annex I to the Birds Directive, • Review of the National Biodiversity Gateway Network (NBGN) www.searchnbn.net to identify any known and for regularly occurring migratory species. records for protected or notable species • Solent and Southampton Water SPA (approximately 1.75km south-east of the site) – an area of 5400 • Review of information provided by the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre to identify relevant hectares designated due to the presence of mudflats supporting bird species including the mediterranean designated sites and habitats. gull, dark-bellied brent geese, roseate tern, sandwich tern, teal, common tern, ringed plover, little tern andIt should be noted that this assessment is based on the current site conditions and management regime and the black-tailed godwit.information available from the desk study, in the absence of any ecological site surveys or consultation with the 9.3.3 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)County Ecologist. For this reason the assessment is necessarily precautionary. On completion of more detailedassessments, it may be possible to discount some of the potential risks identified. If conditions on the site A Site of Special Scientific Interest or SSSI is a conservation designation denoting a protected area in the UK.change, then the ecological value of the site and potential to support certain species is likely to also change as SSSIs are the basic building blocks of UK nature conservation legislation and most other legala result. nature/geological conservation designations are based upon them, including National Nature Reserves, Ramsar Sites, Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation.9.2 Existing Conditions • Upper Hamble Estuary and Woods (approximately 2.3km east of the site) – 151 hectares of SSSIThe 8.6 hectare site is currently dominated by a crop of maize supported by a silty sub-soil. A footpath designation. The site includes woodland community species of ancient semi-natural woodland. There isovergrown with grass circumnavigates the perimeter of the site. A patch of grassy wetland is maintained to the a graduation from the woodland to estuarine saltmarsh, dominated by species such as sea couch grass,south-east of the site which provides attenuation to surface water drained off the crop area. sea club rush and sea arrow grass. The mudland supports large populations of marine invertebrates andThe site is bounded by a mixture of mature and semi-mature trees, shrubs, and brambles/ long grass. Trees is subsequently a feeding ground for birds including waders and ducks.line the majority of the east and southern boundaries. • Lincegrove and Hackett’s Marsh (approximately 1.85km south-east of the site) - 37 hectares of mature9.3 Designated Sites saltmarsh, supporting sea purslane, common cord grass, saltmarsh grass, sea lavender, thrift, sea asterThe site is not covered by any statutory or non-statutory designations for nature conservation. and sea club rush, and providing a feeding ground for waders and geese.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 35 of 73
  • 32. Buro Happold9.3.4 Ramsar SitesRamsar sites are wetlands of international importance designated under the Ramsar Convention. The initial Upper Hamble Estuaryemphasis was on selecting sites of importance to waterbirds within the UK. In the UK Ramsar sites are given & Woods (SSSI)the same strict legal protection as sites designated under the Birds and Habitats Directive as part of the Natural2000 network (SPAs and SACs). • Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar (approximately 1.75km south-east of the site) – 5300 hectares of wetland of international importance, supporting 20,000 waterfowl and species including the teal sandwich tern and the roseate tern.9.3.5 Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Solent MaritimeA Local Nature Reserve is a statutory designation under Section21 of the National Parks and Access to the (SAC)Countryside Act 1949. LNRs are places with wildlife or geological features that are of local special interest andoffer opportunities to members of the public to study, learn or appreciate nature. LNRs have a degree of Hackett’sprotection against development on and in the vicinity. Marsh (LNR) • Hackett’s Marsh LNR (approximately 1.85km south-east of the site) – 20.5 hectares of saltmarsh and Lincegrove & Hackett’s Marsh (SSSI) meadows supporting uninterrupted grassland and saltmarsh habitats. Solent &9.3.6 Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) Southampton WaterThe non-statutory SINC system highlights sites that are important at a local level to ensure that the interest of (RAMSAR, SPA)these sites is not lost. SINCs form part of a wider national network of non-statutory locally valued wildlife sitesand are generally administered by local authorities in partnership with conservation organisations. Local plan Figure 9-1 Location of statutory designated sitespolicies exist to help protect these sites: There are a number of SINCs in the locality of the site. The SINC criteria identify sites that are considered to be of particular importance in Hampshire and are defined by Hampshire County Council. Policy 23.NC SINCs worth noting, as identified by the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre are the ‘Priors Hill Development which is likely to have a direct or indirect adverse affect on a Site of Importance for Copse/Hound Grove’ (criteria: 1A - Ancient semi-natural woodland) and ‘Priors Hill Brickworks’ (criteria: 1B - Nature Conservation (SINC) will not be permitted, unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of other woodland where there is a significant element of ancient semi-natural woodland surviving/ 2D - the Borough Council that the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the need to safeguard the grasslands which have become impoverished through inappropriate management but which retain sufficient elements of relic unimproved grassland to enable recovery/ 3Bi - areas of heathland which are afforested or nature conservation value of the site. If development is to be permitted, the Council will require have succeeded to woodland if they retain significant remnants of heathland vegetation which would enable appropriate measures to be taken to mitigate for the adverse effects on the SINC. their recovery), 200m and 850m south of the site respectively, as these sites are downstream receptors of theSource: Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review drainage ditch present on the site in question.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 36 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 33. Buro Happold9.4 Key Habitat Features conservation concern amber list, and 18 listed on the BTO red list. 25 birds are protected under Section 1 of the WCA 1981. Please see Appendix D for full details.From the desk study and initial site visit the following key habitat features of the site have been identified: • A total of 59 notable/ protected higher plant (flowering plant) species – The Tubular Water-dropwort • Trees – The trees lining the east and southern boundaries could provide potentially valuable ecological (Oenanthe fistulosa), Triangular Club-rush (Schoenoplectus triqueter) and Annual Knawel (Scleranthus habitat. Tree lines can play an important role in providing habitat connectivity and, in particular, can often annuus) are designated under UK BAP; 6 species are designated under the Hampshire BAP; 2 species, function as important foraging and commuting corridors for bats. Semi-mature and mature trees the Bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scripta) and Triangular Club-rush (Schoenoplectus triqueter) are themselves can also offer habitat to nesting birds, roosting bats and invertebrates. protected under Section 8 of the WCA 1981. Please see Appendix D for full details. • Hedgerows – The hedgerows defining primarily the northern site boundary could provide wildlife-rich • A large number of notable/ protected invertebrates are recorded with many designated under the UK and habitats for many species of concern, including globally threatened or rapidly declining species. Hampshire BAPs. Hedgerows are important for butterflies and moths, smaller farmland birds and dormice. Hedgerows also act as wildlife corridors for many species including reptiles and amphibians. • According to records supplied by the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre, the following mammals are all designated under the UK BAP except for the Badger which is legally protected under the • Scrub and grassland/ wetland area – the area of wetland supporting grass and rushes to the south-east Protection of Badgers Act 1992: of the site provides potential habitat for reptiles and amphibians. • Badger (Meles meles) • Water Vole (Arvicola terrestris)9.5 Protected or Notable SpeciesHampshire Biodiversity Information Centre • West European Hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) • Harvest Mouse (Micromys minutus)Information provided by the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre indicated that the following legally • Otter (Lutra lutra)protected or notable species have been recorded within a 2km radius from the site (for details of the level oflegal protection afforded to each species see Appendix D). Note that many of these species are likely to be Bat Recordsfound in the SAC/ SPA/ SSSI sites which are greater that 1.5km from the site and are unlikely to be unaffected The Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre does not hold records of any species of bat present in theby development. locality of the site. Bat records should be sought prior to planning application from the Hampshire Bat Group, • A total of six amphibians and reptile species have been recorded within a 2km radius of the site, of which however at the time of writing records were unavailable. only the great crested newt is a priority species in UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP): Considering the presence of semi-mature trees and hedgerows lining the outskirts of the site, roosting habitat is • Slow-worm (Anguis fragilis) • Grass Snake (Natrix natrix) available and hence the presence of bats likely. Consultation should be held prior to planning application stage with the Hampshire Bat Group to gain further detailed information. • Common Toad (Bufo bufo) • Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus) 9.6 Implications for Site Development: Ecology • Common Lizzard (Lacerta vivipara) • Adder (Vipera berus) 9.6.1 Key ecological issues The key ecological issues potentially associated with this site are: • Bats (European protected species) – could potentially be using grassland and site boundaries/hedgerows • A total of 78 notable/ protected birds – 24 species designated under the UK BAP, 32 listed as priority for commuting and foraging and mature trees for roosting species under the Hampshire BAP, 46 listed under the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) birds ofSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 37 of 73
  • 34. Buro Happold • Great Crested Newts (European protected species) – could potentially use the hedgerows and grassland The following ecological assessment may be required to fully assess the ecological value of the site and as terrestrial habitat and movement corridors therefore the implications to development: • Badgers (UK protected species) – could use the site for foraging • Updated desk study • Reptiles (UK protected species) – could be present in the grassland and field margins • Consultation with County Council ecologist • Birds (UK protected species) – could be using the site for foraging and nesting including the hedgerows • Botanical survey and trees. • Wintering bird surveyThe implications on future development depend very much on the scale and extent of any proposal and the • Bat surveysnature of the ecological resources found to be on site. • Great Crested Newt surveysIf legally protected or notable species were found to be present on site then any proposed development wouldneed to be designed such to avoid any illegal or damaging activities. This may involve changes to the timing of • Badger surveycertain activities, protection and retention of certain features within the development, and/or provision of • Reptile surveyadequate mitigation measures to permit a licence from Natural England to be obtained to permit the proposed • Invertebrate surveysactivities. Mitigation requirements could include: • Removal of vegetation in the winter to avoid the bird breeding season • Translocation of species from the site to a suitable receptor site (not possible for all species)In some cases where licences need to be obtained, detailed surveys will be required to support the application.Under PPS9 (Planning Policy Statement 9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation) when determiningplanning applications the local authority must ensure that species and habitats are protected from the adverseeffects of development and must assess whether any harm to biodiversity is outweighed by the need andbenefit of the proposed development when determining planning applications. Opportunities for ‘building-in’beneficial biodiversity features into the proposal should therefore be taken to ensure any proposal representsgood design and conforms with best practice guidelines.9.6.2 Further Assessment RequirementsTo ensure any development proposal adequately addresses the ecological issues associated with the site it isimportant to obtain as much information on the current ecological status of the site as early in the planning anddesign process as possible. It should be noted that many ecological surveys are seasonally restricted andtherefore should be planned into the development timetable well in advance to avoid delays to submission of aplanning application.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 38 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 35. Buro Happold10 Built Heritage and Archaeology10.1 IntroductionThe possibility of any heritage or archaeological findings on or near the site was investigated through theEnglish Heritage website and consultation with the Landscape, Planning and Heritage department at HampshireCounty Council. A map highlighting the locations of findings in relation to the site is shown in (larger copies areprovided in Appendix E). Full information for the Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) numbers quoted in themap can be found in Appendix E.10.2 ArchaeologyA search for any archaeological records undertaken by Hampshire Landscape, Planning and HeritageArchaeology confirmed a number of records within the vicinity of the site, as highlighted in Figure 10-1. Many ofthese records have been unearthed to the south-west of the site along Grange Road and at the Old Netley DairyFarm. Those closest to the site are: • ID: 50215 – recorded observation and earthworks within the gardens of the Manor House PH. The event was recorded in 2000 as part of the Historic Rural Settlement project. • ID: 50217 – traces of pre-turnpike road junction and green from the medieval to post-medieval period (1066 – 1850). The event was recorded in 2000 as part of the Historic Rural Settlement project. • ID: 54657 – A potential site of a small church. The church at Netley, noted in 1086, may have been located in Old Netley. The area around this grid reference was noted as being a chapelyard on the 1696 terrier. This area now comprises a hummocky pasture field. A document of 1603 noted that the chapel had been out of use for many years. This document also suggests that this chapel was consecrated in 1411 to 1412 and may be a different chapel to that mentioned in Domesday Book. • ID: 54783 – a cartographic depiction of a shrunken village at Old Netley based on historical mapping. Figure 10-1 Archaeological records in the site region • ID: 50214 - site of pound in Pound Lane, recorded as part of the Historic Rural Settlement project 10.3 Historic Buildings • The locations of post-medieval buildings have been recorded in archaeological documentation, outlined A search for historical buildings undertaken by Hampshire Landscape, Planning and Heritage confirmed five in the 1838 Tithe map: ID: 50221, 50223, 50224, 50225, 50226, 50227, 50228 records within 1km of the site, as shown in Figure 10-2. The only record within a reasonable proximity to the site is ID 50698 comprising a barn at Old Netley Farm to the south of the site. The barn is unlisted and has been converted into two domestic units.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 39 of 73
  • 36. Buro HappoldFigure 10-2 Historical buildings in the area10.4 Implications for Site DevelopmentAlthough there are a number of listed buildings, archaeological findings and archaeological events near to thesite, none are located on the site itself. It is not anticipated that development of the site will cause any adverseeffects on the existing sites, but it is expected that the planning authority will require archaeologicalinvestigation (e.g. trial trenching) prior to any development of the site.Consultation with the district archaeologist would confirm whether any further assessment of the site is requiredprior to development, and/or an archaeological watching brief during construction is required.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 40 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 37. Buro Happold11 Traffic and Transport11.1 Site LocationThere is a well connected highway network surrounding the site, with the M27 within a 2 km driving distance(Figure 11-1). Site Figure 11-2: Local Highway Network (Image produced using Microsoft AutoRoute) Shop Lane is a 4 metre wide rural lane, with no footways. The speed limit on Shop Lane is 30 mph. Portsmouth Road is a two-way road, with footways on either side at the Shop Lane intersection. The speed limit on Portsmouth Road is 40 mph changing to 30 mph on entering Bursledon. Beverley Gardens and Green Lane are both cul-de-sac residential roads, connecting to Portsmouth Road. 11.2 Bus The site is reasonably well connected to the local bus network (Figure 11-3), which is operated by FirstGroup. Portsmouth Road, situated to the South of the site is served by bus routes 72 and 80. Route 72 runs between Gosport Ferry and Southampton, with a frequency of 1 service per hour on weekday peak hours. Route 80 runsFigure 11-1: Strategic Location (Image produced using Microsoft AutoRoute) between Fareham and Southampton, also with a frequency of 1 service per peak hour. Other routes which serve the nearby region are 78, 79, 16A and 12C.Figure 11-2 shows the site’s surrounding road network, which consists of Beverley Gardens, Green Lane &Hamble Lane (A3025) to the East, Portsmouth Road (A3025) to the South, Shop Lane & Grange Road to theWest, and Bentley Road (B3033) & Bursledon Road (A3024) to the North.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 41 of 73
  • 38. Buro Happold Site SiteFigure 11-3: Local Bus Network (Source: FirstGroup)11.3 Railway Figure 11-4: Railway Stations (Image produced using Microsoft AutoRoute)Bursledon and Hamble are the closest railway stations to the site (Figure 11-4). They are on the West Coastway 11.4 AirportLine, operated by South West Trains. There is an hourly service between Southampton Central and PortsmouthHarbour on each day of the week, with additional trains at peak periods. The site is located 4 miles southeast from Southampton Airport. Southampton airport is accessible from the site, within a 6 mile drive along the M27. Southampton Airport has its own dedicated railway station,Route 16A can be taken to Netley railway station, whilst route 16A which is accessible from Hamble Road goes Southampton Airport Parkway. Fast trains run three times an hour from London Waterloo directly to the airportto Hamble railway station. Routes 72 and 80 are available for public transport between the site and Bursledon station.station. Bursledon station is approximately 3.5km to the south east of the site and Hamble Station isapproximately 2.5 km to the south west of the site. 11.5 Trip Generation Assuming a development density of 30 dwellings per hectare over 75% of the site area, the site which has an area of approximately 7.5 hectares can accommodate approximately 170 dwellings. The proposed development will typically have a trip profile which is higher over the weekday AM and PM peak periods, with trip activity predominantly being outbound in the morning peak and inbound in the evening peak. The computer package TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) has been used to estimate peak hourRevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 42 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 39. Buro Happoldtrip generation for the proposed development. From application of relatively recent survey data (between 2000- Another option would be to provide an access route from the site directly onto Portsmouth Road via the field2007) available within the TRICS database, for private residential housing developments in the South East, the situated to the west of the site, and hence would require access or ownership negotiations. This route wouldaverage AM and PM peak hour vehicle trip rates have been estimated as 0.58 and 0.5 respectively per dwelling. intersect through Shop Lane, and hence require junction options to be tested. Connection onto PortsmouthIt has been calculated that the development will generate approximately 100 and 85 vehicle trips over the AM Road would be in the form of a priority junction.and PM peak hours respectively. These trip estimations are inclusive of both inbound and outbound vehicle Another option is to provide an external connection from the site onto Hamble Lane. This route would starttrips. approximately half way down the site’s eastern boundary length, and then intersect through the fields situatedResults of a manual traffic count undertaken on 08/09/08 on Portsmouth Road at the intersection with Shop to the east of the site, along with Green Lane, to arrive at Hamble Lane at the location of the Jurd WayLane, indicate westbound and eastbound hourly traffic flows of 400 and 450 vehicles respectively, between roundabout. This would also require negotiations regarding access arrangements.12:15-13:15. The proposals would significantly increase traffic volumes in the vicinity of the area. It is Foot access to the site already exists from the north east and west (public footpath) and from the southrecommended that traffic count surveys are carried out followed by traffic modelling for peak hour periods on (informal access from Shop Lane). The footpath will need to be maintained as part of any future development.the roads onto which site access is proposed, this will enable an assessment of available spare capacity andthe effect the development will have on the existing local highway network to be ascertained. This assessment 11.7 Planning Policywould indicate whether any actions are required to mitigate the effects the development is expected to have on 11.7.1 Hampshire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011the highway network. Furthermore if necessary, such actions would support approval of any planning Hampshire’s current Local Transport Plan (LTP) covers the period from 2006 to 2011. The LTP sets out theapplication to the Local Authority. County Council’s transport strategy and has been designed to achieve wider policy objectives, such as:11.6 Site Access • improving quality of life,Internal permeability is important for any proposed residential development but the area also needs to be • protecting the environment, andappropriately connected with adjacent street networks. A development with poor links to the surrounding areacreates an enclave which encourages movement to and from it by car rather than by other modes. Looking at • securing economic prosperity.the nature of surrounding residential developments, the aim should be to provide multiple connections, with a 11.8 Way Forwardminimum of two accesses. The nearest roads from the site, onto which there is potential to construct external In order to ensure a thorough understanding of the key transport issues it would be appropriate to engage withsite access, are Shop Lane, Portsmouth Road, and Hamble Lane. the local Authority once initial proposals for the site have been established. A Transport Assessment would alsoDiscussions would be necessary with the Local Council and Planning Authority, Eastleigh Borough Council, in be required to support the planning application for the proposed development. The contents of this documentorder to ascertain their thoughts on the development and access proposals, including any likely mitigation would be agreed with the relevant authorities through a Scoping Study. In addition a Masterplan in support of ameasures they would be required. Applications within Bursledon will also be considered by Bursledon Parish sustainable transport strategy is advised.Council. The Bursledon Parish Councils view is taken into account by the Planning Authority when arriving at itsdecision.Two accesses could be provided onto the stretch of Shop Lane which borders the west side of the site,however this would require an upgrade of this road to a higher capacity (minimum carriageway width of 4.8m inaddition to footway), and several trees to be removed. It is expected that development traffic would split in boththe north and south directions from access onto Shop Lane, in order to take access onto Botley Road andPortsmouth Road respectively.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 43 of 73
  • 40. Buro Happold12 Landscape and Visual12.1 IntroductionThis section considers the landforms around the site, the current land uses, the current views of the site andsurrounding land, and identifies the key receptors around the site that would be affected by the development.Information has been gathered from the site visit carried out on 08/09/2008, from the Eastleigh Borough LocalPlan and from the Urban Character Assessment for Eastleigh.Photographs of the site and surrounding area are provided in Appendix A.12.2 LandformThe Eastleigh Borough Local Plan proposals map designates the site as countryside. This refers to a rural partof the borough lying outside the housing settlement boundaries and general employment areas as defined by Figure 12-1 Green Lane looking norththe urban edge.The area in the vicinity of the site is broadly flat with no imposing hills or valleys present. The site itself is 12.3 Visualessentially level with only local variations, and has an level of approximately 40m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) 12.3.1 Views into the siteThe urban edge of Bursledon is located directly east of the site boundary along Beverley Gardens. An Urban Along Shop Lane, a line of semi-mature trees and shrubbery lines the southern development boundary (FigureCharacter Assessment has been developed for Eastleigh Borough Council to prepare guidance to development 12-2), limiting views into the site. The footpath entrance, controlled by an operational footpath gate and acontrol staff and prospective planning applicants, to ensure that new development in the borough is dilapidated vehicle gate on the north-west corner provides the only opportunity for viewing the site along thissympathetic to its surroundings and helps retain the overall character associated with the area. The report will route, as shown in Figure 12-3.be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document in the Eastleigh Borough Local Development Framework.The document describes the adjacent residential housing of Beverley Gardens as inter-war/ immediate post-wardevelopment in fair condition (strength of character: moderate). The document also notes that properties inBeverley Gardens have no significant views. Properties at the southern end of Green Lane (see Figure 12-1) aredefined as Victorian to intermediate post-war villas/ semi-detached pairs (strength of character: moderate).Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 44 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 41. Buro Happold floor balconies. These properties are illustrated in Figure 12-4 and Figure 12-5. Although there are limited views into the site at present, creation of site access routes (see Section 11) may create further view corridors into the site.Figure 12-2 Tree line along Shop Lane – view to south east Figure 12-4 Properties on Beverley Gardens overlooking the siteFigure 12-3 Entrance to site from Shop Lane – view to north eastThe eastern site boundary is lined by scattered semi-mature tress. A number of properties (gardens andresidential units) along Green Lane, Beverley Gardens border the eastern site margin, in addition to the twobungalow properties adjacent to the western corner of the site, generally have a limited view of the Figure 12-5 Properties on Green Lane partially overlooking the siteundeveloped, open land. However, where gaps in the tree line are present, a number of properties alongBeverley Gardens and Green Lane are afforded clear views of the site from both ground floor levels and secondSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 45 of 73
  • 42. Buro Happold12.3.2 Views within the siteWithin the site boundary, views are limited and currently dominated by a crop of maize. A patch of open, boggygrassland supporting rushes is present at the south-eastern corner of the site.12.3.3 Views from the siteFew views are available from the site due to the surrounding shelterbelts and tree lines. The north part of thesite is slightly elevated and some views may be available depending on the layout of any future development.Some properties along Green Lane and Beverley Gardens are visible along the eastern site boundary.The adjacent agricultural field to the north, similarly in maize at present, is visible over the hedgerow boundary.Other views are restricted to those available through small gaps in the shelterbelts such as Shop Lane to thewest.12.4 Sensitive Visual ReceptorsThe potential key sensitive visual receptors identified are: • Residents of properties along the western side of Beverley Gardens and Green Lane • Users of Shop Lane • The occupiers of the two houses to the north west of the site12.5 Implications for Site Development: VisualThe proposed development would alter the views of the site from the residential units along Beverley Gardensand Green Lane, the occupiers of the two houses to the north west, and users of Shop Lane.Careful consideration should be given to the design of the proposed development to ensure that it respects andenhances its setting and minimises the impact on the currently designated strategic gap. This could beachieved through careful consideration of housing density, orientation and massing of buildings, landscapedesign and location of access routes.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 46 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 43. Buro Happold NEC A Daytime < 55 dB LAeq,16h13 Noise and Vibration Night-time < 45 dB LAeq, 8h13.1 Introduction NEC B Daytime 55 – 63 dB LAeq,16h Night-time 45 – 57 dB LAeq, 8hA preliminary, desk based noise assessment has been undertaken for the site, to supplement informationgained during the site visit. NEC C Daytime 63 – 72 dB LAeq,16h Night-time 57 – 66 dB LAeq, 8h13.2 Baseline ConditionsAmbient noise levels are influenced by road traffic noise from Portsmouth Road and Shop Lane, and to a lesser NEC D Daytime > 72 dB LAeq,16hextent from Hamble Lane. However in no part of the site was road traffic noise considered to be dominant or Night-time > 66 dB LAeq, 8hintrusive.The topography between the site and these two roads is flat, with both largely hidden by trees, and there will be Table 13—1 PPG24 NECssignificant soft ground attenuation of noise. The guidance provided by PPG 24 for each of these NECs is as follows:No other significant noise sources were identified in the area. NEC A Noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting13.3 Planning Policy Guidance note 24, Planning and noise planning permission, although the noise level at the high end of the category should not be regarded as a desirable level.The aim of PPG24 is ‘to provide advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impactof noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on development or adding unduly to the costs and NEC B Noise should be taken into account when determining planning applications and, where appropriate, conditions imposed to ensure anadministrative burdens of business’. It seeks, through land use planning, to site noisy development away from adequate level of protection against noise.noise-sensitive land uses and, wherever practicable, to ensure that noise-sensitive development is separatedfrom major sources of noise. NEC C Planning permission should not normally be granted. Where it isPPG24 has been the central guidance document for noise assessments of this kind in the UK since it was considered that permission should be given, for example because therepublished by the Department of the Environment in 1994. However, its main objective is to provide guidance on are no alternative quieter sites available, conditions should be imposed tothe introduction of noise-sensitive development in areas which are affected by existing environmental sources ensure a commensurate level of protection against noise.of noise such as roads and railways. To this end, PPG24 sets out a series of four Noise Exposure Categories NEC D Planning permission should normally be refused.(NECs) which correspond to various levels of environmental noise and for which planning guidance is provided: Table 13—2 PPG24 NEC guidance 13.4 Assessment Noise levels on the site will vary according to the distance from the Portsmouth Road and Hamble Lane as the main sources of traffic noise. In the south of the site development will generally not be less than 50m from Portsmouth Road, with almost all developable land significantly further than this from the main source of road traffic noise. In the east of the site development will be over 300m from Hamble Lane. Significant attenuationSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 47 of 73
  • 44. Buro Happoldof road traffic noise will occur over these distances, such that prevailing noise levels would place the site in NECA or NEC B as defined by PPG 24. Based on these very indicative estimations, PPG 24 recommends:“For NEC B - Noise should be taken into account when determining planning applications and, whereappropriate, conditions imposed to ensure an adequate level of protection against noise.For NEC A - Noise need not be considered as a determining factor in granting planning permission, althoughthe noise level at the high end of the category should not be regarded as a desirable level.”13.5 Construction ImpactsConstruction of the new development is unlikely to cause noise and vibration issues to nearby residentsbecause of the relatively low intensity and short term nature of construction activity for any development.13.6 Implications for Site DevelopmentMitigation measures are unlikely to be required to protect the site from road traffic noise from either PortsmouthRoad or Hamble Lane.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 48 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 45. Buro Happold14 Air Quality 14.2 Air Quality Objectives Part IV of the Environmental Act 1995 requires Local Authorities to periodically undertake reviews of the air quality in their districts and assess the present and likely future quality with regard to standards prescribed by14.1 Introduction the Government, as laid out in The Air Quality Standard Regulations 2007.The UK Government Air Quality Objectives (AQO)are set out in the UK Air Quality Strategy (Defra 2007) and areshown below in Table 14—1. For the purposes of this report, at this stage of the development proposal the statutory assessments undertaken by the Local Authority have been used rather than any site specific monitoring. Pollutant To be met by Period Frequency Criterion Eastleigh Borough Council is the local authority responsible for assessing and monitoring air quality in the Bursledon area, with Southampton City Council responsible for the adjacent area to the west. CO 2004 8-hr Maximum annual running 8-hour 10000 μgm-3 mean As detailed in the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review, the council aims to contribute towards the government’s target to achieve a 20% reduction in the 1990 level of carbon dioxide emissions by 2010. Policy NO2 2005 1-yr Annual average 40 μgm-3 34.ES of the local plan puts an obligation on development proposals to make an appropriate contribution towards the government’s reduction target. Benzene 2003 1-yr Annual average 16.25μgm-3 In terms of local Air Quality Management (AQM), the council has an ongoing duty to review and assess air 2010 1-yr Annual average 5 μgm-3 quality. Where a statutory air quality objective is likely to be surpassed, an AQM Area must be declared and an action plan implemented to improve the local air quality. This is set out in Policy 33.ES of the local plan. -3 1, 3 butadiene 2003 1-yr Annual average 2.25 μgm 33.ES Where new development appears likely to have a significant impact on air quality in the locality, or future occupiers of the development may be subject to unacceptable air quality, the Council will PM10 2004 24 hr Number of days when 24 hour 35 days require a suitable air quality assessment to be carried out prior to consideration of the application. mean PM10 limit value of 50 μgm-3 is exceeded Source: Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001 – 2011) 1-yr Annual average 40 μgm-3 An AQMA was declared by Eastleigh Borough Council in 2006 for exceedences of NO2 at Hamble Lane, approximately 400m from the development, this is illustrated in Figure 14-1. 2005 24 hr Number of days when 24 hour 7 days -3 mean PM10 limit value of 50 μgm is exceeded 1-yr Annual average 40 μgm-3Table 14—1 UK Air Quality Objectives -3μg/m = micrograms per metre cubedSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 49 of 73
  • 46. Buro Happold There are no AQMAs in place for any of the other pollutants specified in the UK Air Quality Strategy, PM10 levels are also monitored, and no annual exceedences have been recorded. In 2005 six Air Quality Management Areas were declared by Southampton City Council due to transport related NO2 exceedences, Victoria Road was added to this in 2006. These AQMAs are highlighted in Table 14—2 below with distance from the site. AQMA Distance from Development Site Reason for AQMA Declaration Bevois Valley 6.9 km NO2 exceedence Annual mean of 54.3μg/m3 (2006) Bitterne Road West 3.5 km NO2 exceedence Annual mean of 40μg/m3 (2006) Winchester Road 8.3 km NO2 exceedence Annual mean of 42.9μg/m3 (2006) Town Quay 6.7 km NO2 exceedence Annual mean of 43.9μg/m3 (2006) Redbridge Road 9.3 km NO2 exceedence Annual mean of 40μg/m3 (2006) Victoria Road 4.5 km NO2 exceedence Annual mean of 39.4μg/m3 (2006) Romsey Road 9.6 km NO2 exceedenceFigure 14-1 Hamble Lane AQMA Annual mean of 46.2μg/m3 (2006)The guideline concentration is exceeded at two points where 2006 monitoring results recorded levels in HambleLane of 41.68μg/m3 and 45.4μg/m3. The development is expected to cause an increase in traffic on Hamble (3) Table 14—2 Southampton AQMAs in relation to the proposed siteLane and therefore possibly increase NO2 levels in an already sensitive area. At the site visit it was noted that In terms of air quality these are a considerable distance away from the site, Figure 14-2 illustrates this.automated traffic monitoring was in place on Hamble Lane north of the Jurd Way roundabout, which is possiblylinked to the existence of the AQMA.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 50 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 47. Buro Happold Based on the above concentrations it is obvious that air quality close to the site is relatively poor, with NO2 levels exceeding National objective levels of 40μg/m3. However the projected levels produced by Eastleigh Borough Council indicate a predicted decrease in NO2 concentrations by 2010, and concentrations at the above sites are expected to drop to 39.45μg/m3 and 38.61μg/m3 respectively. Southampton Council have also predicted and modelled a decrease in NO2 levels in Bursledon, along Bursledon Road, approximately 1 mile from the development site. There are no exceedences of any other pollutant in this area. 14.3 Pollution from Roads The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) (2003) states that it is only necessary to consider sections of road within 200m of the receptor site for purposes of an air quality assessment. There are a number of roads within 200m of the site these are; A3025 Portsmouth Road, Beverley Gardens, Wheelers Mow, Green Lane, Shop Lane, Cranbury Gardens, Manor Close, Lowford Hill, Pound Road and Elmslie Gardens. The location of these roads is highlighted on the in Figure 11-2 (Transport section). There is no traffic flow data for the roads around the site apart from Portsmouth road, which had a two way average 12 hour traffic flow of 12609 in 2003, and traffic data for Bursledon Road (0.46km away) has a twelve hour two way traffic flow of 15535/day in 2003(5).Figure 14-2 Southampton AQMAs in relation to the site Government guidance states that roads with less than 10,000 vehicles per day are unlikely to have a negativeThe closest monitoring points to the proposed site are summarised in Table 14—3below. impact on air quality. In areas where road traffic is a major source of pollution, concentrations fall rapidly with distance from the road. Site Name Distance to Site Type of Site NO2 concentration As an example, the conservative screening methodology provided by the Department for Transport (DfT) indicates that, at 30 metres from the kerbside, concentrations are reduced by 50%; at 50 metres the reduction Hamble Lane, Bursledon 300m Roadside 3 41.68μg/m is 70%. 3 Other roads in the vicinity are either residential or small B-roads, which are unlikely to have an impact on air Hamble Lane 2, 300m Roadside 45.4μg/m quality, and will not have traffic flows which exceed 10,000 vehicles per day. Air quality monitoring on Bursledon Portsmouth Road, 3.21 km away, indicates that in terms of NO2, air quality is reasonable, 30.8μg/m3 (2006), and it is likely that traffic flows along Portsmouth Road close to the site will not have implications on air quality in theTable 14—3 Closest NO2 monitoring sites based on 2006 data area or at the site.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 51 of 73
  • 48. Buro HappoldIncreases in traffic along Hamble Lane could have an effect on air quality at the site, as this is a designatedAQMA and further exceedences of the National Air Quality Objectives could potentially occur, further monitoringof traffic flows would be necessary to determine the effect of increased traffic along Hamble Lane due to thedevelopment.14.4 Other Air Quality IssuesIt is understood that there are no Part A industrial processes, as specified by the Environmental ProtectionRegulations (1991) as amended and Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) regulations withinBursledon.There are two local authority pollution prevention and control processes in the area; these are a petrol fillingstations (1.4 km away) and a BP Safeway Service Station (0.9 km away). Both are controlled by the localauthority with the necessary power to control any unreasonable emissions to the atmosphere. Neitherinstallation is considered to adversely affect quality conditions at the site. The Fawley oil storage and refiningfacility is approximately 5.6km to the south.14.5 Implications for Site Development – Air QualityFrom the perspective of air quality the site is suitable for residential development as monitoring illustrates thatthere are no exceedences or predicted exceedences of NO2 or PM10 in the area, excluding that at Hamble Lane.In order to determine whether or not increased traffic on Hamble Lane would cause further deterioration of airquality due to high NO2 levels, further analysis of more recent monitoring results is recommended, along withthe possibility of further monitoring and modelling to ensure no exceedences are expected with higher trafficlevels. There are no potentially significant impacts from the surrounding roads and there are no other sources ofair pollution in the vicinity of the site which could adversely affect air quality. The local authority has concludedthat air quality in the Bursledon area is above the standard set in the National Air Quality Objectives.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 52 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 49. Buro Happold Low Pressure (LP) gas mains run parallel to Portsmouth Road with junctions to branches serving Beverley15 Utilities Gardens (eastern verge) and Green Lane (eastern verge) to the east of the site. A Medium Pressure (MP) gas mains runs parallel with the western verge of Hamble Lane to the east of the site. Plans indicate that no gasAn infrastructure search was commissioned using Groundwise Searches Ltd (11 September 2008) to obtain utilities are present along Shop Lane to the south-west.plans of apparatus in the vicinity of the site from all utility providers registered in the region. This chapter givesa brief description of the services identified based on the plans received from the utility providers. The 15.4 Implications for Site Development: Gasimplications for future development of the site for residential and commercial use as associated within the The presence of low pressure gas mains within the vicinity of the site suggests that the proposed developmentlocation and presence of utilities is also discussed. can be supplied with gas.Location plans received from utility providers are shown in Appendix G. The accuracy of the plans cannot be Consultation with Scotia Gas (the holding company of Southern Gas Networks) should be undertaken toguaranteed and are for general guidance only. Exact locations would need to be confirmed via a survey. determine the capacity and upgrade works that are required should the site link directly into the existing gas network. The possible option of the installation of a gas main along Shop Lane, with a connection to the15.1 Electricity existing supply along Portsmouth Road will require consultation with Scotia Gas to determine the feasibility ofInformation regarding low voltage and high voltage above and below ground power lines within the vicinity of connection and design considerations.the site has been provided by Scottish and Southern Electric Power Distribution. If modifications to the Portsmouth Road – Shop Lane junction are anticipated, the below ground gas mainsAn 11kV High Voltage (HV) below ground power line is located along the northern verge of Portsmouth Road to running parallel to the northern verge of Portsmouth Road may have to be lowered to provide sufficient coverthe south-east of the site, extending along the western verge of Shop Lane immediately west of the site. HV underneath the new road surface. This is common practice and should not cause any restriction to sitebelow ground power lines are also present along the eastern verge of Beverley Garden immediately to the east, development.and along the western verge of Green Lane to the east. 15.5 Water15.2 Implications for Site Development: Electricity Southern Water has provided records of potable water supply mains located within the vicinity of the site. AThe presence of below ground power cables within the vicinity of the site suggests that the proposed distribution mains runs along the southern verge of Portsmouth Road, with branches supplying properties alongdevelopment can be supplied with electricity. Consultation with Scottish and Southern Energy should be the eastern verge of Beverley Gardens, and the western verge of Green Lane. There are no potable distributionundertaken to determine if any upgrade works are required. mains along Shop Lane or Grange Road.Further investigation is required to determine the exact location of the high voltage power cables located 15.6 Implications for Site Development: Wateradjacent to the site. The presence of potable water supply within close proximity of the site suggests that the site can be servedShould the development be accessed via Shop Lane, or via a new junction on Hamble Lane approximately with potable water. Consultation with Southern Water will be required to determine the current available250m to the east in conjunction with a road cutting across Green Lane, buried cables running along either Shop capacity of the network and determine whether any upgrading will be required to serve the proposedLane or Green Lane may require lowering to provide nominal cover underneath the new road surface. This is development.common practice and should not cause any restriction to site development. 15.7 Sewerage and Drainage15.3 Gas Plans highlighting the foul and surface water public sewerage network in the vicinity of the site have beenMaps showing the location of below ground gas mains within the vicinity of the site have been provided by supplied by Southern Water. Southern Water are only responsible for public sewers in this area and thereforeSouthern Gas Networks, the principal gas transporter in the locality of the site. do not show any private sewers or connections that may be present.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 53 of 73
  • 50. Buro HappoldA foul water sewer network serves existing residential development to the south-east of the site and generally 15.10 Implications for Site Development: Telecommunicationsdrains towards the south. A 150mm Vitreous Clay (VC) foul sewer serves the properties of Beverley Gardens The presence of telecoms cables within the vicinity of the site indicates that the proposed development can beand properties located at the lower end of Green Lane. Foul sewers are not shown to be present along supplied with a telecom service. If proposed access routes cross existing underground cables, consultationPortsmouth Road westerly past the Plough PH, along Shop Lane and on Grange Road. with the provider will be necessary, and repositioning costs may be incurred.The site currently transfers surface water runoff into a drainage ditch running along the eastern boundary of the 15.11 Oil/ Fuelsite (see Section 7 - Water Resources). Information regarding oil pipelines present within the vicinity of the site has been provided by Fisher GermanNo public surface water sewers are indicated on the plans provided by Southern Water. Chartered Surveyors. Their plans indicate that an operation oil pipeline owned by Government Pipelines and Storage Systems (GPSS) passes through the site running approximately south to north (solid line on plan in15.8 Implications for Site Development: Sewerage and Drainage Appendix G). The route of an abandoned pipeline also runs parallel to the operational pipeline (dotted line onThe site currently has no public sewer facilities or connections. There are no existing activities resulting in the plan in Appendix G).production of biological sanitary waste, and surface water is treated via natural diversion and attenuation. Theintroduction of new development will require due consideration of foul and surface water facilities. The GPSS is a United Kingdom pipeline system managed by the Oil and Pipelines Agency (OPA) on behalf of the Secretary of State for Defence. The facilities are constructed and maintained under the Land and WarSurface water: As the development is anticipated to increase the impermeable area coverage, surface water Works Act 1945 and 1948 and the Land Powers (Defence) Act 1958.runoff rates will heighten and therefore require adequate drainage and attenuation measures. Surface watermay be transferred through a sewer main to connect into the existing public network, or discharged through a The operational pipeline section is part of the Aldermaston (Reading) to Satchell Lane (Hamble) pipeline route,combination of soakaways and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDs), or to local drains. comprising a steel formed 200mm (8 inch) diameter pipe, with a 725psi operating pressure. The depth below ground level is approximately 1.1m; however this varies over the length.Foul water: The installation of foul sewers will be required to transfer sewerage from the site to the publicnetwork to the south-east. The oil pipeline enters the southern extent of the site adjacent to Portsmouth Road, progressing in a north- north-west direction to exit the site along the northern boundary line defined by a footpath. There are twoConsultation with Southern Water will be required to determine the available capacity within the sewerage GPSS markers indicating the location of the pipeline that were noted on the site visit. These are situated on thenetwork and consequently determine whether any upgrade works to the existing network will be required as a western boundary to the site adjacent to Shop Lane (Figure 15-1), and on the northern edge of Portsmouthresult of development. Road.15.9 TelecommunicationsA number of telecommunication providers were consulted to establish the presence of any under ground orabove ground cabling in the vicinity of the site. British Telecom (BT) and Virgin Media are the onlytelecommunication suppliers operating cable services in the locality of the site.Virgin utility plans show below ground cables running along the southern verge of Portsmouth Road, withbranches into Beverley Gardens and the southern end of Green Lane.BT utility plans show an underground cable running along the western verge of Shop Lane and along bothverges of Beverley Gardens. Overhead lines run parallel to the northern verge of Portsmouth Road and alongthe western verge of Green Lane.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 54 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 51. Buro Happold • New utilities such as gas, water and electricity serving the site may have to pass beneath the pipeline with a 300mm separation, crossing the pipeline at right angles where possible (minimum 60 degrees). Roads and railways, small diameter gravity sewers or drains and other minor services (at the discretion of OPA) will generally be permitted to pass over the pipeline. Note: the wayleave is a buffer zone generally extending 3.048m either side of the outside of the pipeline. This is shown in Figure 15-2. Further consultation with GPSS is required to establish the most suitable approach for development affecting the pipeline. Initial discussions with a GPSS representative highlighted the above implications to development, and highlighted the following primary options: • divert the pipeline away from the site area as necessary – this will incur a high diversion cost • provide an easement for access to the pipeline with a 3m buffer band either side of the pipe.Figure 15-1 GPSS pipeline marker on site boundaryThe approximate routes of the operational and abandoned pipelines are provided in Appendix G. Should theexact route of the pipelines be required, the pipeline contractor, Amco Construction will need to be contacted topeg out the location on site.15.12 Implications for Site Development: Oil/ FuelOperational PipelineGPSS have issued a document entitled ‘Standard requirements for crossing or working near to GPSS pipelines’(December 2004). The key points noted in this document that are envisaged to impact site development are: • Consent under Section 16 of the Land Powers (Defence) Act is required for the majority of work within the wayleave. The erection of buildings or obstructions within the wayleave is generally not permitted. The construction of essential crossing points such as roads and paths is permissible (note: crossings should where possible transverse the pipeline at right angles, minimum 60 degrees). • The OPA will generally agree to the diversion, lowering or re-alignment of a GPSS pipeline, providing such arrangements do not impact on the ability of the pipeline to fulfil its transportation functions safely. • A Section 16 consent should be submitted to the OPA, providing a detailed summary of the site and proposed work, drawings of existing and proposed services, risk assessments and method statement, emergency procedures, responsibilities, form of indemnity. Consultation should be held with the ODA to establish the full information required for a Section 16 application.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited Page 55 of 73
  • 52. Buro HappoldFigure 15-2 Oil pipeline location and wayleave buffer zoneAbandoned PipelineThe abandoned pipeline originally carried hydrocarbons (petroleum products), and as part of the abandonmentprocess it is likely that the pipeline was flushed, water filled and capped off. As such, due care should be takenwhen working in proximity to the pipeline to prevent breakage.Alternatively, the section of pipeline underneath the site may be removed and disposed of as furnace scrap.This includes excavation, cleaning, status confirmation, section removal and disposal from site, and grout fillingof the annulus at each cut point.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal ReportPage 56 of 73 Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 53. Buro Happold16 Conclusions and Recommendations Ecology If legally protected or notable species were found to be present on site then any proposed development wouldThe key issues related to the site in Bursledon are summarised as follows along with recommended further need to be designed such to avoid any illegal or damaging activities. This may involve changes to the timing ofinvestigations: certain activities, protection and retention of certain features within the development, and/or provision of adequate mitigation measures to permit a licence from DEFRA or English Nature to be obtained to permit thePlanning Policy and Land Use proposed activities.The Eastleigh Borough Local plan proposals map locates the site in question in an area designated as The following ecological assessment may be required to fully assess the ecological value of the site andcountryside and a strategic gap. As such, there is a policy presumption against development in this location. therefore the implications to development:The RSS core strategy has identified gaps as constraints to sustainable development. The Panel Report on theRegional Spatial Strategy for the South East Plan recommends frequent review of the gap boundaries in • Updated desk studyHampshire. • Consultation with Council ecologistFurther consultation and possible surveying is required to identify the MAFF ALC grade 3 sub-category in order • Botanical surveyto establish compliance with the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review. • Wintering bird surveyAs detailed in the local plan, the provision of 35% affordable housing is required for sites with the capacity to • Bat surveysaccommodate 15 or more dwellings. • Great Crested Newt surveysWater • Badger surveyIn line with planning guidance for flood risk (PPS25), a Surface Water Drainage Strategy will be required as part • Reptile surveyof a Flood Risk Assessment to demonstrate how surface water will be controlled on site. The assessmentshould consider fluvial flooding from the adjacent drainage ditch/ Butlocks Heath stream. The strategy should • Invertebrate surveysinclude the consideration of Sustainable Urban Drainage system (SUDS) options for sustainable surface water Archaeologymanagement. It is anticipated that the planning authority will require archaeological investigation (e.g. trial trenching) prior toContaminated Land, Geology and Soils any development of the site. Consultation with the county archaeologist would confirm whether any furtherIn accordance with PPS23, a preliminary risk assessment based on a detailed desk study and geo- assessment of the site is required prior to development, and/or an archaeological watching brief duringenvironmental investigation with regards to contamination should be conducted when a sensitive land use such construction is required.as housing is proposed on land potentially affected by contamination. Traffic and TransportAt the appropriate time, a geo-environmental site investigation should be carried out in conjunction with the In order to ensure a thorough understanding of the key transport issues it would be appropriate to engage withgeotechnical investigation which will be necessary to collect data on ground conditions (and which will also the local Authority once initial proposals for the site have been established. A Transport Assessment would beallow foundation and drainage design for any future development). required to support the planning application for the proposed development. The contents of this document would be agreed with the relevant authorities through a Scoping Study. In addition a Masterplan in support of a sustainable transport strategy is advised.Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 54. Buro HappoldLandscape and VisualThe proposed development would alter the views of the site from the residential units along Beverley Gardensand Green Lane, the occupiers of the two houses to the north west, and users of Shop Lane.Careful consideration should be given to the design of the proposed development to ensure that it respects andenhances its setting. This could be achieved through careful consideration of housing density, orientation andmassing of buildings, landscape design and location of access routes.Noise and VibrationConstruction of the new development is unlikely to cause noise and vibration issues to nearby residentsbecause of the relatively low intensity and short term nature of construction activity for any development.Mitigation measures are unlikely to be required to protect the site from road traffic noise from either PortsmouthRoad or Hamble Lane.Air QualityThe site is suitable for residential development as monitoring illustrates that there are no exceedences orpredicted exceedences of NO2 or PM10 in the area, excluding Hamble Road. In order to determine whether ornot increased traffic on Hamble Lane would cause further deterioration of air quality due to high NO2 levels,further analysis of more recent monitoring results, along with the possibility of further monitoring and modellingto ensure no exceedences are expected with higher traffic levels is recommended.The local authority has concluded that air quality in the Bursledon area is above the standard set in the NationalAir Quality Objectives.UtilitiesThe presence of electricity, gas, potable water supply, sewerage and drainage, and telecommunications withinthe vicinity of the site indicates that the proposed development can be supplied with utility services required forresidential purposes.The erection of buildings or obstructions within a 3.048m wayleave either side of the GPSS oil pipeline will notbe permitted. New utilities such as gas, water and electricity serving the site may have to pass beneath thepipeline with a 300mm separation, crossing the pipeline at right angles where possible. Due care should betaken when working in proximity to the pipeline to prevent breakage. Further consultation with GPSS isrecommended to establish the most suitable approach for development around the pipeline.Revision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal Report Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 55. Buro HappoldReferences Contaminated Land Communities and Local Government (2004) Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control, TheGeneral Stationery Office, LondonBursledon Parish Council http://bursledon.org/ Environment Agency (2002). Potential Contaminants for the Assessment of Land - Contaminated Land Report 8 (CLR8)Eastleigh Borough Council http://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/ Environment Agency (2004) Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11Envirocheck Report, ref 26251179_1_1, dated 04/09/2008 EcologyHampshire County Council http://www.hants.gov.uk/ Magic Geographical Information System http://www.magic.gov.uk/Neighbourhood Statistics http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/ National Biodiversity Gateway Network (NBGN): http://www.searchnbn.netPlanning Policy and Land Use Natural England http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Eastleigh Borough Council: Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001 – 2011)http://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/ebc-2094 Protected and Notable Species Search from Hampshire County Council Biodiversity Information CentreGovernment Office for the South East (2007) Panel Report on the Regional Spatial Strategy for South East Built Heritage and ArchaeologyEngland http://www.gos.gov.uk/gose/planning/regionalPlanning/southEastPlan/?a=42496 English Heritage http://www.english-heritage.org.ukHampshire County Council: Hampshire Structure Plan Saved Policies http://www.hants.gov.uk/structureplan/ Archaeological Search from Hampshire County Council Landscape, Planning and Heritage departmentSocio-economic and Community: Traffic and TransportHome Office http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/ia/atlas.html Hampshire County Council (2006) Local Transport Plan (2006 – 2011)Office for National Statistics http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/ Landscape and VisualWater Resources: Eastleigh Borough Council (2008) Local Development Framework: Character Area Appraisals – Bursledon,Communities and Local Government (2006) Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk, The Hamble-le-Rice and HoundStationery Office, London Noise and VibrationEastleigh Borough Council (2006) Local Development Framework: Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Communities and Local Government (2004) Planning Policy Statement 24: Planning and NoiseEnvironment Agency flood map: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/maps Air QualityEnvironment Agency water quality http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/maps The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, Vol 1 Eastleigh Borough Council Air Quality Progress Report 2007 http://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/PDF/AirQualityProgressApril2007.pdfSite Appraisal, Shop Lane, Bursledon Revision 01Site Appraisal Report October 2008Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 56. Buro HappoldSouthampton air quality action plan, 2008http://www.southampton.gov.uk/Images/Air%20Quality%20Action%20Plan_tcm46-201416.pdfAir quality review and assessment; detailed assessment for Southampton,http://www.southampton.gov.uk/Images/Detailed%20Assessment%202007_tcm46-200707.pdfAnnual traffic flowshttp://www.southampton.gov.uk/Images/O.%20APR%20Annex%20F%20Traffic%20Flows_tcm46-160680.pdfUtilitiesFisher German Chartered Surveyors: GPSS Oil Pipeline Information (August 2008)Groundwise Searches Limited: Utility Plans, ref 4939LERevision 01 Site Appraisal, Shop Lane, BursledonOctober 2008 Site Appraisal Report Copyright © Buro Happold Limited
  • 57. Richard OrrissBuro Happold LimitedCamden MillLower Bristol RoadBathBA2 3DQUKTelephone: +44 (0)1225 320600Facsimile: +44 (0)870 787 4148Email: richard.orriss@burohappold.com

×