Contact: Sarah Applegate, ext 6795/Neil Thompson, ext 6049

1. Summary

1.1 Eastleigh Borough Council has resolved to publish the First Deposit Draft of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001-2011). The County Council has been requested to provide a Statement of Conformity and approve the transport policies for publication.

1.2 This report summarises and considers the main planning and transportation proposals and recommends that a Statement of Non-Conformity be issued. It also describes the procedural requirements leading up to the decision by the Executive Member for Environment on 12 December 2001.

2. Procedures

2.1 Before the Local Plan is put on initial deposit the County Council has to issue a statement that the plan is or is not in general conformity with the structure plan. A Statement of Non-Conformity counts as an objection to the deposited plan.

2.2 The decision on general conformity is a Key Decision for the Executive Member for Environment in the County Council's Forward Plan because of its significant effects on communities living or working in the area. The assessment of conformity is, however, largely a straightforward, technical process of comparing the policies and proposals in the Local Plan with the policies in the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Review) (HCSPR).

3. Background

3.1 The Eastleigh Borough Local Plan First Deposit is due to be published in January 2002, together with an Urban Capacity Study document. The plan will replace the existing Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (adopted 1997) and will cover the Borough for the period 2001 to 2011, although the housing and open space chapters are likely to be reviewed before the end of 2003.

3.2 The plan will be placed `on deposit' for six weeks during January/February 2002 to allow for formal objections to be made. The Borough Council intends to publish the Second Deposit Plan in September 2002, which will be subject to a public Local Plan Inquiry - likely to be held between May-July 2003.

3.3 The purpose of this report is to comment upon the strategic conformity issues and the specific transport proposals. The County Council will be able to submit formal objections or representations on specific matters or policies following the deposit in January. A copy of the local plan text, as agreed for publication by Eastleigh Borough Council's Executive, and the Urban Capacity Study are available for inspection in the Planning and Surveyor's Library.

4. Deposit Plan: Main Policies and Proposals

Overall Strategy

4.1 The Local Plan covers the period up to 2011, although it states that the housing and open space chapters will be reviewed by 2003. The underlying objectives of the Local Plan are to promote urban regeneration, conserve the countryside, promote sustainability and minimise travel demand, whilst promoting the use of public transport. The individual elements of these general objectives are set out in more detail below.

Housing Provision

4.2 Policy H1 of the HCSPR requires the provision of up to 94,290 dwellings between 1996 and 2011.

4.3 As part of that provision Policy H2 requires a baseline housing provision of 6,295 dwellings to be identified in Eastleigh Borough between 1996 and 2011. This baseline provision includes the proposal for a Major Development Area (MDA) of 3,000 dwellings with associated facilities and infrastructure south-east of Eastleigh. With the completions between 1996 and 2001 being 2,086 dwellings the resulting baseline is 4,209 dwellings for the period April 2001 to March 2011.

4.4 In addition, Policy H4 requires reserve housing to be identified in the plan. Within Eastleigh Borough this totals 1,500 dwellings with a further 1,000 in the MDA.

4.5 The Local Plan records that the Borough Council "will ensure that sufficient additional housing is planned for during the period 2001-2011, to meet the requirements identified in the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Review)". However, it admits that "further work will need to be carried out in order to identify those locations". The proposed levels of supply to meet the Structure Plan requirement over two phases, 2001-2006 and 2006-2011, is summarised below and is set out in more detail in the attached appendix.

Requirement Period Policy H2 Policies H2

and H4

Structure Plan 1996-2011 6,295 8,795

Net completions 1996-2001 2,086 2,086

Remaining

Requirement 2001-2006 2,105 3,355

2006-2011 2,105 3,355

Supply 2001-2006 2,515 2,515

2006-2011 1,277 1,277

Balance to find 2001-2006 -411 840

2006-2011 828 2,078

Total to find 2001-2011 417 2,917

4.6 The Borough Council proposes to meet the housing requirement for the baseline provision by reviewing existing commitments, creating additional urban capacity sites (in part by the large allocations outlined below) and identifying sufficient land within the Dowds Farm Special Policy Area. However, over the longer term if the need for the reserve provision is considered there remains a balance to be found of 2,917 dwellings.

4.7 The Local Plan indicates that shortfall, any remedies to address it and any refinements of the urban capacity work will be addressed in the proposed review of the Housing chapter of the plan by December 2003. The draft plan also assumes that by this time the strategic planning authorities' response to the housing provision figures for Hampshire in the latest Regional Planning Guidance (RPG9) published in March 2001 might be available.

4.8 The draft Local Plan proposes to reduce the affordable housing threshold from applying to developments of 25 dwellings or more in the adopted Local Plan, to applying to developments of 15 or more dwellings or sites of 0.5 hectares or more.

4.9 Housing allocations within the plan are identified as follows:

(i) Pirelli Phase I;

(ii) Pirelli Phase II;

(iii) former Caustons site, Brookwood Avenue, Eastleigh;

(iv) non-conforming use sites including Hendy Ford, Chandlers Ford; Nuttall's Yard, Allbrook; Fenton's Plant Hire, Horton Heath and land off Common Road, Chandlers Ford;

(v) Botleigh Grange, Hedge End;

(vi) Ensign Park, Hamble-le-Rice; and

(vii) land at Scotland Close, Fair Oak.

Urban Renaissance, the Built Environment

and Environmental Sustainability

4.10 The First Deposit Plan identifies an east/west corridor in Eastleigh for redevelopment, which stretches from Barton Park to the point where the M3 crosses Leigh Road. The key sites within this area which are expected to become surplus to requirement or where existing users are likely to relocate are:

(i) Eastleigh Magistrates Court;

(ii) Eastleigh Borough Council's Civic Offices;

(iii) Pirelli site, Leigh Road;

(iv) former Causton's site, Brookwood Avenue;

(v) Eastleigh Town `Renaissance Quarter';

(vi) Eastleigh Town Centre;

(vii) Barton Park; and

(viii) site of Tankerville Special School and Eastleigh Health Centre.

4.11 A `Renaissance Quarter' is identified within Eastleigh town centre which the draft Local Plan envisages could accommodate a net addition of up to 1,000 dwellings. This area consists of development either side of Leigh Road from the Pirelli site up to the Church of the Resurrection and development both sides along Romsey Road. A development brief is also under preparation for Barton Park which will consist of a mix of uses which should complement and integrate with the town centre, including a landmark bridge and buildings.

4.12 The chapter contains a new policy on the promotion of home zones.

Countryside

4.13 The plan identifies two Strategic Gaps - Southampton-Eastleigh and Southampton-Hedge End/Bursledon/Netley - and eight local gaps. Special policy areas have been identified at Hamble Community School and Hampshire Police Headquarters which set out the criteria for consideration of any future development on these sites. A policy is included for the Forest of Bere.

Nature Conservation

4.14 The objectives are set out as the promotion of bio-diversity, and the identification and protection of areas of nature conservation interest. This chapter includes policies on Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation and the designation of local nature reserves.

The Economy

4.15 The plan aims to strike a balance between providing development to maintain competitiveness/low unemployment, protecting the environment, and reducing the need to travel.

4.16 Eastleigh Borough Council prepared a paper entitled Employment Land Requirements (January 2001) which concluded that the Local Plan should allocate three hectares of land for general employment uses on vacant urban sites. These sites consist of land at the Fire Service Headquarters, on the Alstom's site and for office development within the Pirelli sites and Caustons sites. In addition the plan states that offices should form part of development on emerging town and district centre sites, and existing employment sites should be retained, with the exception of those non-conforming use sites highlighted for redevelopment.

Town and Local Centres

4.17 The plan outlines the hierarchy of large and small town centres and village and local centres, and neighbourhood parades. A strategy for Eastleigh town centre is set out in detail. Various redevelopment proposals are outlined, including the surface level car park adjacent to Tesco superstore and the block north of Wells Place.

Public Open Space and Sports

4.18 The plan advocates the development of a green network of open spaces linking country parks, river valleys and natural wild spaces. A special policy area has been identified at the Rose Bowl and Tennis Centre to balance additional recreational development with the openness of the strategic gap.

Transport Proposals

4.19 The transport strategy in the draft Local Plan emphasises the integration of transportation and land use planning promoted in the HCSPR and endorsed in Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport (March 2001) and Regional Planning Guidance for the South-East (March 2001).

4.20 The draft Local Plan includes guidance and criteria for new development where it does not compromise the achievement of the headline Road Traffic Reduction Act target for the Borough. It encourages sustainable development and the management of travel demand, with emphasis on encouraging walking, cycling and public transport facilities.

4.21 In addition the draft plan supports many of specific transport schemes listed in Policy T16 of the HCSPR, including a new station at Chandlers Ford, Botley Bypass, and the extension of South Hampshire Rapid Transit from Fareham to Woolston. It safeguards the land necessary for the implementation of these schemes and requires contributions from developers to assist with funding. However, the draft plan omits the proposal for a strategic Park and Ride either in the Windhover or Stoneham areas which are also specific proposals in Policy T16 of the HCSPR.

5. County Planning Officer's Comments

Overall Housing Provision

5.1 The proposals in the local plan must be based on the housing requirement in the HCSPR. This means that the Local Plan must allocate sufficient sites to meet both the baseline and reserve housing provision in the HCSPR. It fails to do this with a shortfall of almost 3,000 dwellings in relation to the combined baseline and reserve provision over the plan period 2001-2011. Even setting aside the concerns expressed elsewhere in this report that the draft Local Plan is over optimistic in its assessment of the potential for house-building within existing urban areas, the Borough Council's calculations show that additional proposals are needed to meet the Structure Plan requirement. At present any views on the possible impact of the overall, county housing provision in the latest RPG on individual, district requirement is pure speculation and the hope expressed in the draft Local Plan that its failure to allocate sufficient land for housing will somehow be resolved by the strategic planning authorities' response to the recently published Regional Planning Guidance is misguided and misinformed.

5.2 The most immediately noticeable aspect of the draft Local Plan is that, in the light of a reassessment of the capacity of the urban areas of the Borough to accommodate additional development, there is no provision for a MDA south-east of Eastleigh.

5.3 The four MDAs promoted in the HCSPR provide for the development needs of Hampshire that cannot be accommodated within existing urban areas. The strategic locations for these developments were selected following an exhaustive, public examination of numerous options. The scale of development at each location was based first on an assessment of the needs arising in three, broad geographic sub-divisions of the county: northern Hampshire, eastern Hampshire and western Hampshire; and second on advice from all those involved in the Structure Plan process of the capacity of existing urban areas to accommodate new development.

5.4 The HSCPR recognises that, although there will be scope to increase the range of development opportunities in urban areas, this capacity is difficult to measure and that increased activity in urban areas may increase pressures on a whole range of public and private services. There will be no gain for future generations if the environment of existing urban areas is degraded through the overburdening of urban systems. Accordingly, there may be a limit beyond which activity cannot be increased without diminishing the quality of life for existing and future residents. It is one of the responsibilities of a local plan to highlight these issues and articulate the implications of choices that are there to be made.

5.5 The issue to be addressed when considering the draft Local Plan is therefore not simply the omission of the proposed MDA (which in itself could be considered a matter of non-conformity) but rather the impact of the Borough Council's decision to meet the housing requirement in a different way.

5.6 The Borough Council provided one assessment of urban capacity during the preparation of the HCSPR. A reassessment has been made and the detailed results provided in the background document. This urban capacity document sets out the individual sites investigated as suitable for development. The capacity figures identified are significantly in excess of any previous figures provided by the Borough.

5.7 Substantial housing development - possibly in excess of 2,000 dwellings - is planned both within and adjacent to Eastleigh Town Centre during the plan period. The impact of this scale of development on the existing infrastructure, facilities and services in the area is not addressed in the local plan. The consequences of various businesses being displaced by residential redevelopment schemes are not explained. No phasing or sequence of development for the sites is proposed. It is not possible to ascertain from the plan how and when individual sites will come forward for development. The development of most of the sites requires the preparation of detailed development briefs and transport assessments. The draft plan fails, therefore, to address many of the criteria for urban regeneration set out in the HCSPR.

5.8 In looking essentially only at the first five years of the plan period, the Local Plan fails to provide sufficient clarity about the longer term. Not only in terms of the actions that the Borough Council will take to ensure that the development as envisaged takes place (for example previously developed land does come forward and the businesses displaced by certain of the housing allocations are relocated); but also in terms of how the Borough, particularly Eastleigh town, will function in terms of the social, economic and environmental well-being of the residents.

5.9 The policies in the HCSPR clearly establish that it is the role of a local plan to provide certainty and clarity so that investment decisions can be made and infrastructure and services provided. The reliance of the local plan on a future supply of dwellings from many uncertain quarters is a risky strategy at the best of times. However, the plan fails to conform to the basic principles of the HCSPR if it is deficient in the details both in terms of what will be provided (in terms of the mix of development and how the new schemes will be assimilated into the existing fabric of the urban areas) and the mechanisms of delivery.

5.10 The draft Local Plan signals the difficulties behind its strategy by identifying that the Housing chapter will be reviewed by 2003. According to the Borough Council's own timetable this publication will occur after the public Local Plan Inquiry into the draft Local Plan has taken place and before the plan is formally adopted. The uncertainty surrounding the future pattern of development and change in the Borough could thus persist for many years into the future.

Economy

5.11 The economic policies are in general conformity with the relevant policies in the HCSPR.

Countryside and Other Policies

5.12 These policies are in general conformity with the relevant policies in the HCSPR.

6. County Surveyor's Comments

6.1 The transport objectives of the draft Local Plan chime with those of the HCSPR and the Hampshire Local Transport Plan. In addition the traffic management proposals support the sustainability objectives of the County Council's overall transport strategy.

6.2 With regard to transport implications of new development the Local Plan identifies a package of traffic reduction measures, including Green Travel Plans. There is also clear support for the County Council's Review of Parking Standards.

6.3 The draft Local Plan supports many of the detailed transport schemes identified in the HCSPR. However, it does not include proposals to enable the development of strategic Park and Ride to serve South Hampshire on the grounds that there are insufficient commuters accessing Eastleigh Town Centre to justify any additional proposals and the sites identified in the HCSPR would be in strategic gaps where there is a presumption against development. Additional information is required on the justification of this omission before a full appraisal of the implications of this omission can be made.

Recommendations

1. That the Executive Member for Environment be informed that Eastleigh Borough Council should be advised that, at such time as a copy of the published First Deposit Local Plan is served on the County Council under Section 46 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, a statement be supplied to Eastleigh Borough Council stating that the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan is not in general conformity with the Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) 1996-2011 as it fails to meet the overall housing provision for the Borough in Policies H2 and H4 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) for the period 2001-2011 and to demonstrate how:

(i) the objectives for urban regeneration established in Policies UB1, UB2 and UB4 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) will be implemented; and

(ii) the requirements and formula for funding the provision of infrastructure, services and amenities needed to support the proposed developments in the plan as required by Policy IMP1 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan (Review) have been assessed.

2. That the County Council agrees the general transport content of the plan for consultation purposes.

3. That the County Planning Officer and County Surveyor, in consultation with the Executive Member for Environment as necessary, should be authorised to make appropriate representations or objections on the First Deposit Plan when it is formally published.

6861/SA/NTAPPENDIX

HOUSING PROVISION AS AT SEPTEMBER 2001

(some figures have been rounded)