development consultation forum n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Development Consultation Forum PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Development Consultation Forum

Development Consultation Forum

100 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Development Consultation Forum

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Development Consultation Forum Havant Road, Emsworth5th December 2012

  2. Programme • 18.00 - Introduction – Councillor David Guest • 18.05 - Explanation of process, policy background and planning history – Stephen Cantwell / Adele Maher • 18.15 - Presentation by Developers • 18.35 - Invited speakers • 18.40 - Written consultee responses – Stephen Cantwell • 18.50 - Developer response to issues raised • 19.00 - Councillor opportunity to ask questions • 19.30 - Summary of key points – Stephen Cantwell • 19.40 - Chairman closes Forum meeting

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

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

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

  6. Havant Road, Emsworth

  7. Havant Road, Emsworth

  8. Planning Policy – Framework • Applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 • Development Plan includes: • Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 • Saved policies from 2005 Local Plan • Other material considerations include: • NPPF • Draft Local Plan (Allocations)

  9. Planning Policy – Key policies Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and saved policies • Policy CS17 concentrates new development within the existing urban areas. Development in the non urban areas are only permitted in accordance with countryside policies in the NPPF. • Policy CS11.9 seeks to maintain the undeveloped gaps between settlements including Emsworth and Havant • Saved policy UF1: development should not diminish gaps between settlements, either physically or visually The proposed development conflicts with these policies

  10. Planning Policy – Material Considerations National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) • Plan positively to support local development • Planning should be genuinely plan-led, empowering local people to shape their surroundings • In response, HBC are positively progressing the Local Plan Draft Local Plan (Allocations) • Aims to allocate sites to meet development needs • Consultation currently underway to ensure local people have an opportunity to shape their surrounding through plan-led system • Adoption scheduled December 2013

  11. Planning Policy – Material Considerations Draft Local Plan (Allocations) – content • Site is referred to as UE2b: Land at Havant Road • Not identified as a preferred site to meet the development needs of Emsworth • Considered that better sites are available at this time • If the Council were to apply weight to the Draft Plan, which is possible through the NPPF, planning policy would recommend the proposal was not supported because it is not a preferred site for development

  12. Planning Policy – Material Considerations Draft Local Plan (Allocations) – aim of consultation • Decisions on what were the preferred and discounted sites included in the Draft Local Plan (Allocations) were made on the basis of evidence available at that point • There are a number of sites with potential to meet the development needs of Emsworth • Each of the sites under consideration brings opportunities and challenges • Aim of consultation is for people to make representations supporting, or objecting to, the draft policies and allocations

  13. Planning Policy – Material Considerations Draft Local Plan (Allocations) – decision making • If the landowner/developer or public disagrees with the Council’s approach with regard to UE2b, the consultation provides an opportunity to put forward the reasons why it should be included • The correct forum for deciding which sites are most suitable and should be allocated is through the plan-led system - the Local Plan (Allocations) • Therefore, it would be premature to consider a planning application on this site before the public, including all the landowners/developers, have an opportunity to comment on the Draft Local Plan (Allocations)

  14. Planning Policy – Material Considerations Pre- Submission Local Plan (Allocations) – next steps • Planning Policy advises the applicant to make representations to the Draft Local Plan (Allocations) • Planning Policy will consider all the representation received and advise the Council about which sites it recommends to allocate in the Pre-Submission Plan • If UE2b is considered to be the most suitable site, based on evidence base, it will be recommended for allocation • Pre-Submission Allocations has a weight, and support could be recommended on the basis that it is an allocated site in the emerging plan • The Pre-Submission Local Plan (Allocations) is scheduled to be published in April 2013

  15. Presentation by Developers

  16. Invited Speakers

  17. Invited speakers:Emsworth Residents’ Association • Housing target could be achieved from other more preferable sites • ERA has received representations from local residents in Selangor Avenue • Havant Borough is a densely developed area, the development of the site would reduce the gap significantly

  18. Invited speakers:Emsworth Residents’ Association • Retention of the Havant/Emsworth gap is essential to maintaining the spatial character of the area • Less vulnerable sites should be developed first • Since the previous DCF 3 factors should be considered: • The no. of houses in Emsworth has decreased

  19. Invited speakers:Emsworth Residents’ Association • Havant has altered its policy regarding flooding in Emsworth • Joint infrastructure is essential. A piecemeal approach is undesirable • The flood alleviation scheme and new housing development needs to be considered and funded in a comprehensive manner

  20. Invited speakers: Warblington and Denvilles Residents’ Association • Would like to be included in the consultation process in future • Would like more about the water table, the soil structure and drainage. • More evidence that the SUDS scheme is capable of dealing with the proposed development • Would like to see more evidence regarding the consultation distances for the gas pipeline

  21. Invited speakers: Warblington and Denvilles Residents’ Association • The site is downwind of the road and pollution is likely to be a problem for future occupiers.

  22. Invited speakers: Warblington and Denvilles Residents’ Association

  23. Invited speakers:Havant Tree Wardens

  24. Invited speakers:Havant Tree Wardens

  25. Invited speakers:Havant Tree Wardens

  26. Consultee Responses

  27. Consultee Responses:Emsworth Architect’s Panel • Identified through the LDF as a discounted site. • Small scale of presentation information makes it hard to assess • Concern regarding access close to busy roundabout with A27 underpass • Concern over scale transition from bungalows on Selangor Avenue to the 2.5 storey houses

  28. Emsworth Architect’s Panel • site layout uninspiring • footpath routes are poorly integrated to the proposals - on edge and lacks green corridor • green space at either end – whilst there is a need to keep trees and hedgerows green space needs to be more integrated into the scheme • if green space not integrated could be pressure for it to be built on. • site is close to A27 and given the historic problems of road noise are there not better sites.

  29. Consultee Responses:Hampshire Highways • proposed access is suitable subject to speed data and the appropriate visibility splays being achieved • the crossing is being assessed by the signals team, it is anticipated that the principle may be acceptable.

  30. Consultee Responses:HBC Development Engineer (Highways) The applicant will need to submit: • Transport Assessment • Travel Plan • Construction Management Plan • A shared off-road section of cycle path up to Selangor Avenue, with on-road provision along Selangor Ave to Emsworth Primary School.

  31. Consultee Responses:Housing • Affordable housing provision at 30% equates to 40 units. • These should be split by tenure 70/30 affordable rented/shared ownership. • The affordable housing mix should reflect the mix of units proposed on the site • Currently there are in excess of 3900 Havant households registered with Hampshire Homechoice, the councils waiting list. Any additional affordable housing provision will help to meet this increasing demand.

  32. Consultee Responses:Special Projects Engineer (Drainage) • The use of SUDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems) will need to be proven by a hydrological assessment. • The design should consider how to address the excess drainage water which currently spills from the site’s south east corner onto Havant Road. • There may be an opportunity to accommodate additional flows from the north and hence avoid the need for flood defence works in Selangor Avenue.

  33. Consultee Responses:Environmental Health • Noise exposure – significant? • Survey work is needed (24hr periods) • Predict internal & external (garden) noise levels • Noise solutions could include orientation, layout, insulation, bunds, barriers

  34. Consultee Responses:Landscape Architect • Landscape Qualities • Attractive enclosed fields on urban fringe • Narrow site with long boundary to A27 • A27 on well-wooded embankment, visually significant • Mature hedgerow along Havant Road gives seclusion from public view

  35. Landscape Architect • Suitability for Development • Gap Assessment Matrix indicates low suitability for development: • Significant site in narrow gap between Havant and Emsworth • High sense of separation due to clearly defined boundary vegetation

  36. Consultee Responses:HBC Landscape Architect • Recommendation • The site is not recommended for development as an urban extension. • Reasons • The site has high landscape value due to its locally important landscape features. It • contributes to the separation between the adjacent urban areas, by representing a large • proportion of the gap between Emsworth and Havant.

  37. Main Points of DiscussionHeight of propertiesThere are no longer any 2.5 storey dwellings abutting Selangor AvOpen space can be negotiated. The area can be safeguarded by covenant.

  38. Main Points of Discussion • Noise surveys were carried out across a period of 5 days in numerous locations throughout the site and the results are compared to accepted standards. • The housing orientation has been designed to mitigate noise pollution where possible. • The site layout and the natural barrier adjacent to the A27 will mitigate noise pollution • Special glazing can be utilised if necessary.

  39. Main Points of Discussion • The sub soil within the site comprises sub soil and a silty clay, then a loose gravel to below 2.5 m then 3.6-6 m is sand • The water table across the site has been monitored with various bore holes during the last 12 months. It is 1.13-3 metres deep. • In early spring during periods of significant rainfall the ground water was 1.13 and the lowest level was 2m.

  40. Main Points of Discussion • Best porosity is at the north and south of the site • The calculations will be tested and will have to satisfy the requirements of the EA and LPA within any application submitted.

  41. Main Points of Discussion • The strategic gas main is along the eastern boundary. • Discussions with HSC and Southern Gas have confirmed a safety easement of 55 metres • Proposed a diversion of the existing gas main to the western boundary of the site • The new route would be made with a twin sickle thickness

  42. Main Points of Discussion • 6 m safety easement proposed and verified by Southern Gas • Discussions with Southern Gas are ongoing

  43. Councillors’ Questions Q The potential to solve the flooding issue is attractive. Are there other plans emerging to solve the flooding issue? A HBC are working with the EA, HCC and the Coastal Partnership to address the problems and create an Emsworth Alleviation Strategy alongside the Allocations Plan

  44. Councillors’ Questions Q Have there been any discussions with the EA? If not are any planned? Will the developers be prepared to negotiate a contribution towards the planned Emsworth scheme? A There have been discussions with the EA re the volume of flooding and this has helped inform the proposed solutions.

  45. Councillors’ Questions Q Has a PPG assessment been carried out? AThere hasn’t been a PPG assessment as it has been superseded by the NPPF. It could be in category B or C. Undeveloped side approximately 55-60 db The existing barrier adjacent to the road is very effective. There is a contour plan showing the acoustic levels which can be made available.

  46. Councillors’ Questions Q Concerns regarding drainage are fundamental to this site and the rest of Emsworth. Is it correct that the proposed development does not exacerbate the existing situation? Emsworth residents are looking for more than this. A If existing problems can be mitigated they will be.

  47. Councillors’ Questions Q Havant Road is very busy at various times during the day. Is the proposal adequate? A Several traffic surveys have been carried out including CCTV (7 day period in July). Time bands were used: 7.30-9am Length of delay in terms of time Average delay varied during the day up to a maximum of 2 minutes 30 seconds.

  48. Councillors’ Questions 100 vehicles: 40-50 egress onto Havant Rd. Not significant given figure of 1800 vehicles along Havant Rd during peak periods. Proposal within capacity test for the junction. Q What will the proposed timetable for progressing with the development is? A If the site were included in the AP – Dec 2013 onwards. If not included will have to be considered further.

  49. Councillors’ Questions Q How much traffic movement is anticipated out of the proposed site during peak times? A Estimated 90 vehicles per hour in peak times. Majority out of the site (only 25 entering the junction) 80% would be expected to turn right towards Havant and the A27. Therefore little impact on Emsworth expected. This site has less HW impact than other proposed sites.

  50. Councillors’ Questions Q Core Strategy contains a pollution policy which refers to the impact of pollution on children living close by. How will potential pollution be considered and mitigated? A Monitored and information available on web