Outline: construction of up to 250no. Dwellings with access from
Mortimers Lane and pedestrian/cycle links, open space and landscaping,
all matters other than access reserved. (This application is subject to
an environmental impact assessment and is a departure from the
development plan, is a major development, and affects a setting of a
listed building) (Ref.O/15/77190).
This application was taken earlier and became Agenda Item 6.
Consideration was given to the report of the Head of Development Management (Agenda item 7) concerning an application for a construction of up to 250no. Dwellings with access from Mortimers Lane and pedestrian/cycle links, open space and landscaping, all matters other than access reserved. (This application is subject to an environmental impact assessment and is a departure from the development plan, is a major development, and affects a setting of a listed building.) (Ref: O/15/77190).
The Committee was advised of following updates:
· Paragraph 1: Application’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) had been undertaken (also confirmed in paragraph 8). Processed included a referral to the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) who would also be notified of decision. It had not been called in for inquiry.
· Paragraph 12 - Consultation responses: Letter of objection from Mims Davies MP– move towards options B and C in emerging Eastleigh Borough Local Plan which would destroy Stoke Park Woods, result in loss of countryside, affect amenity of residents and increase danger of flooding, and was premature. Would refer to Department for Communities and Local Government if allowed.
· Letter to Councillors from Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) – objection re prematurity/strategic site/loss of countryside and includes challenge to housing numbers (to be addressed through Local Plan).
· Paragraph 42: two additional neighbour letters and one repeat letter (total 55) including concerns regarding capacity of Chickenhall sewage works and headwaters had been received.
· Paragraph 97: As the Hedge End North appeal decision to allow development was subject to legal challenge, and other sites taken out of the supply list, the Council’s current 5 year supply was taken back to 4.23 years, and development proposals could raise this to around 4.44 years using current methodology.
· Paragraph 150: To clarify matters relating to strategic site option delete “It is recognised that for the development to proceed it would need to assist in delivering substantial mitigation solutions which would be required of it as part of strategic development area. This infrastructure includes a northern link road linking Fair Oak to the M3/north Eastleigh via Allbrook, and other major highway improvements”.
Note: HCC Highways support development with mitigation detailed in paragraph 150 but wish to future-proof to also enable contributions to also be spent on strategic projects should that option arise and note Council Statement:
“The Council has a legal requirement to consider all planning applications submitted to it. Bishopstoke, Fair Oak and Horton Heath Local Area Committee taking a decision on the application at Pembers Hill, Fair Oak does not in any way commit the Council to options B and C in the draft local plan. The recommendation from Council planners is based on national and local planning policy considerations”
Prematurity – now raised by objectors and can be material planning consideration - limited weight in the context of need to deliver housing/presumption in favour of development and standalone nature of the development.
The Head of Legal and Democratic Services gave advice contained within the National Policy Planning Guideline ( NPPG), The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the Government’s 2005 extant document the Planning System: General Principles on the matter of prematurity and its limited weight in relation to the current early stage of the new Local Plan, confirming that other material considerations in respect of this application such as the lack of a five year housing supply are likely to have much stronger weight.
That the decision to grant outline planning application be DELEGATED to the Head of Development Management, in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair subject:
(1) The recommended conditions and reasons;
(2) The following additional condition and reason:
Before development commences, details of all crime prevention measures associated with the dwellings and public open space must be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason. In the interest of crime prevention.
(3) Amended Condition 31:
A strategic hydrological survey shall be carried out, conforming to a methodology to be agreed with Eastleigh Borough Council, in consultation with the Environment Agency. Safeguards to preserve the hydrological processes should include:
i. Protection and buffering of the headwaters and the hydrological pathways. The protected area should be kept free of all development including infrastructure.
ii. Management of the surface water flows off site to ensure they are at Greenfield rates.
iii. Management of surface water from the developed areas through naturalised Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) containing three forms of filtration.
iv. Details of short, medium and long term protection and management of the headwaters and headwater stream to ensure water quality is improved, and the headwaters maintain their ecological functions in relation to the health of the River Itchen Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and designated flora and fauna species .
v. Monitoring of the headwaters to ensure no impact on the sensitive hydrology and maintain the ecological functions of the headwaters within the River Itchen catchment.
Reason: To ensure the protection of the headwaters and associated habitats and to alleviate impacts on the River Itchen SAC.
(NOTES: (1) Two members of the public, one County Council Councillor representing Bishopstoke and Fair Oak, one Upham Parish Councillor, one Winchester City Councillor, one Eastleigh Borough Councillor, one Bishopstoke Parish Council Councillor, one Owlesbury Parish Councillor, made representations and raised a number of concerns and objections including:
· Local Plan should be approved before any major housing developments are granted permission thus deeming this application premature;
· Site being outside of urban edge, therefore countryside would be lost;
· Adverse Impact on hydrology;
· Negative impact on existing infrastructure ( health provision, road network , education);
· Impact on South Downs National Park and on villages being in close proximity to the site;
· Negative impact on the air quality; and
(2) A representative of the applicant - spoke in support of the application citing the sustainability of the site. She also stressed that the proposed development would be sustainable in its own right and would not prejudice any strategic option of the Local Plan. Thirty five per cent of properties on site is proposed as affordable housing.)