Agenda item

APP/20/01093 - Land at Sinah Lane, Hayling Island

Meeting of Planning Committee, Wednesday, 10th March, 2021 5.00 pm (Item 3.)

Proposal: Erection of 195No. dwellings, associated open space, pumping station, sub-station and formation of new vehicular access off Sinah Lane. Change of use of land from agricultural to a Wader and Brent Geese Refuge Area (Resubmission of APP/18/00724)

Additional Information

Minutes:

(The site was viewed by the Site Viewing Working Party)

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation from the Head of Planning to grant permission.

The Committee received supplementary information, circulated prior to the meeting which included:

(1) update sheets and a revised recommendation; and

(2) written deputations submitted by Cllr Thomas, Cllr Satchwell, Mr Gateley, Ms Hawdon, Mr Owens, Mr Parham, Mrs Skennerton, Ms Law, Mr Platt, Mr Lowe, Mr Stewart, Havant Friends of the Earth, Ms Maynard, and Ms Rawlinson

The Committee was addressed by the following deputees:

a) Mrs Law, who supported her written deputation by highlighting the following objections to the proposal:

· New evidence highlighted the importance of the site and risks to new and existing new residents

· The present groundwater bulge on the site and its impact.

· The impact of the proposal on Brent Geese

· The mitigation measures for Brent Geese were insufficient and would fail for the reasons set out in her written deputation

· Concerns about a rise in ground water levels

· The applicant had not complied with the conditions attached to the Oysters development

· There were inconsistencies in the submitted Biodiversity Report:

· The applicant’s report did not include fresh evidence which showed that the southern half of the field where the housing was proposed attracted hundreds of Brent Geese to forage

· This development risked building homes on a future tidal marsh and would destroy a successful Primary Support Site.

· the viability of the proposal depended on unresolved mitigation issues for traffic and sewage infrastructure and environmental sustainability and endless obligatory conditions requiring enforcement. Agreeing Planning permission in order to fulfil a 5 year housing supply and receive money for such mitigation was unethical and would not demonstrate a balanced consideration for irreversible damage caused by this proposal.

(b) Mr Parham reiterated his written deputation and highlighted the following objections to the proposal:

• in 2013 the Planning Inspector advocated restricting housing growth to account for the A3023 capacity and flood risks. Neither he nor the residents could predict the Council’s response

• the traffic likely to be generated by the development would exacerbate the existing traffic flow problems on the A3023/bridge.

• the only independent review of the traffic analysis recommended that the correct way to evaluate the impact of the Borough’s housing development on the Island’s roads was if the route was subjected to a flow/capacity analysis. This analysis had not been undertaken even though the data was available

• the traffic analysis included a number of mitigation projects which spread traffic loads across the Island to the detriment of the A3023

• the funding was only 17% of the £10.5m required.

• the Council should require a detailed funding analysis as part of the evaluation process for all housing developments, including this one.

• the shoreline adjacent to the Sinah Lane site was classified as ‘no intervention,’ and threatened by at least a 1.4 metre tide rise prediction. Coastal Partners had declined to comment on this application.

• the sewerage likely to be generated by the development would exacerbate the existing problems caused by the discharge of untreated waste into the Langstone and Chichester harbours resulting in an unsustainable eco-structure.

• the nitrate reduction claims for this site and Warblington Farm were purely aspirational with no details of a process to ensure compliance

· it was questionable whether the site could be sustainably drained

· it was questionable whether the residents of the new development would understand their responsibilities for drainage of the site

· There was uncertainty about the costs and competence of the Management Company

· There was no agreement regarding the management of the surface water part of the SuDs.

· Although the surface water should overflow from the attenuation ‘pond’ into existing and old overland drainage ditches, these were regularly blocked and stagnant, needing frequent maintenance yet run through different land ownerships.

· Langstone Harbour Board objected to this urban development and its damaging effects.

· The sewerage likely to be generated by the development would exacerbate the existing problems of sewerage overflowing onto pathways, roads & people’s gardens.

· it was questionable whether the sewerage and mains water infrastructure would be sustainable for the next 80-100 years for the proposed development

· Proposals for children to walk or cycle to the nearest schools along busy roads and speeding traffic were unsafe

· The incidents of antisocial behaviour and drug abuse in West Park made the route across this park unsafe.

· The lack of lighting on the Billy Trail made this route unsafe for children

· Although the schools, shops and other facilities were in walking distance from the development, it was more likely that the new residents would resort to driving to and from these facilities thereby adding to the existing traffic problems and increasing air pollution

· Only 14.9% of the homes in the development would have charging points and the Council’s own Environmental Health team had questioned why there were no Solar Panels to mitigate against the inevitable transport emissions.

· Barratts’ Nutrient Assessment estimate of the amount of wastewater likely to be generated by the development was less than the figure predicted by Budds Farm and no details submitted on how the development would reduce wastewater. The applicant’s assessment was therefore unsustainable and failed the “perpetuity” test.

(c) Mr Gately, Mr West and Mr Seymour supported the applicant’s written deputation by highlighting the following reasons for permitting the proposal:

· in October 2020 the Committee indicated that it would support an almost identical application, which had been referred to the Planning Inspectorate for determination

· the development met the Council’s new housing allocation policy

· the development was nitrate neutral

· the development was sustainable

· the development would provide a social and economic boost to the island

· the proposal included highway improvements

· no objections had been raised by Council’s ecologist

· the proposal would enable the Council to meet its Housing supply target

· the proposal included a contribution to Solent Mitigation Strategy

· the proposal would deliver a permanent winter bird sanctuary

· fencing and hedgerow planting would reduce disturbance to wildlife habitats

· the proposal did not conflict with approved mitigation for the Oysters development

· the scheme represented a net biodiversity gain

· the applicants shared the residents’ goal for a development free from flood risk

· the objections to the scheme stemmed from a misunderstanding of the proposals

· the site was within a low flood risk zone

· flood risk of the site had been assessed and found to be low

· risk of flooding elsewhere would not increase

· the water reported as laying on the surface of the field by residents was standing rainwater which will be dealt with by the SuDs system

· the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authority had raised no objections

· The tidal influence had been examined and concluded that there was no flood risk to properties

· The pumping and network would be adopted by Sothern Water

· The drainage system proposed was appropriate, sustainable and had sound properties

(During the deputation, the solicitor reminded Mr Gately, West and Saunders that they could not raise issues unless they were included in the written deputation)

(d) Councillor Thomas reiterated the objections raised in her written deputation

(e) Councillor Satchwell reiterated the objections raised in her written deputation and expanded on the following issues:

· Emergency vehicles currently struggled to enter or leave the island

· The Committee should be aware of the highway improvements to be delivered under the scheme before it made a decision.

· The principle of proposed mitigation and developer contributions did not add up.

· It had been demonstrated that protected birds used the southern part of the site. Therefore, the proposal would move the birds already moved under the Oyster development mitigation measures

· A long term agreement has not been made with the RSPB

· There was evidence of flooding of properties in North Shore Road

Councillor Satchwell referred the Committee to model reasons for refusals R61 and R170.

The officers commented on the deputation as follows:

· The Council consulted with statutory and non-statutory consultees as they are the experts

· The RSPB had received updated information and subject to completion of a legal agreement had raised no further comments

· Appendix E summarised the extensive discussions held between the Highway Authority and the applicant.

· The Highway Authority had not objected to the proposal

· The coastal team and the RSPB were aware of concerns about erosion and the potential impact on the bird refuge and had not objected

· Southern Water had advised that they could provide sewerage disposal for this development

· Southern Water would adopt the pumping stations

· Ditches were the responsibility of landowners and monitored by Hampshire County Council, the Lead Local Flood Authority

· The holding tanks and attenuation basin were designed to accommodate drainage for the site

· A back up pump would be provided as part of the development

· Natural England was satisfied that the SuDs arrangements were not a pollution issue

· The development was sited beyond North Shore Road

· The existing sewer in North Shore Road should provide a positive path for water drainage

· The matter before the Committee was the application and not the Local Plan

In response to questions from the Committee, officers advised that:

· The nutrient load for cereal crop was higher than housing development which is why there were no mitigation measures for the nutrient load for this development.

· The decision made by the Council in October was a material consideration

· The submitted application was almost identical to the previous application.

· Since the application was considered in October, the Council had fallen further behind in reaching its housing supply target. Therefore, the planning balance was more in favour of granting permission than in October.

· The Council should be consistent when making decisions.

· Hayling Island Builders owned the site so were responsible for the maintenance of the drainage ditches on this site but this responsibility may have been passed onto the farmers who rented the site from them. Hampshire County were responsible for the maintenance of ditches on their land.

· the specific ditch which would take surface water away from the site had a non-return flap where it drained into the harbour which prevented the tide coming up the ditch. The scheme proposed a second non return valve in the ditch to prevent the tide entering the attenuation pond

· The landowners were responsible for maintenance of drainage ditches; enforcement was the responsibility of the County Council.

· Reports submitted by the applicants were examined by the Council and independent statutory and non-statutory consultees.

· In principle Southern Water had agreed to adopt the pumping station subject to entering into a formal agreement.

· The Committee was required to consider the application on its own merits

· A policy requiring electric vehicle charging points in future housing developments was included in the emerging local plan. However, at this stage, the policy had only limited weight.

· The distances between the existing properties and the proposed dwellings complied with the Council’s policies

The Committee discussed the application together with the views raised by deputees.

Concerns were raised about:

(a) the number of electric charging points to be provided;

(b) the mitigation measures for Brent Geese;

(c) the problems of foul water drainage on the Island and whether the proposed development would increase these problems;

(d) the need to ensure that the conditions were fully complied with; and

(e) whether the infrastructure improvements would be delivered.

However, a majority of the Committee considered as there was little difference between this application and the application considered in October, it would be difficult to refuse this application. The majority of the Committee also considered that housing to be delivered by this proposal would help to meet the demand for housing and in particular affordable housing on the island.

A majority of the Committee were therefore minded to grant full permission

RESOLVED that application APP/20/01093 be granted permission subject to:

(A) a Section 106 Agreement as set out in paragraph 7.102 of the submitted report; and

(B) the following conditions (subject to such changes and/or additions that the Head of Planning considers necessary to impose prior to the issuing of the decision):

1 The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Planning Documents and Plans

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Architectural plans

Site Location Plan PL-01

Proposed Site Layout Plan (Roof Plan) PL-02 P12

Materials Plan PL-03 P13

Boundary Treatment Plan PL-04 P13

Proposed Streetscene Elevations PL-05 P6

Proposed Site Layout Plan (Coloured Version)PL-06 P12

Bin and Cycle Storage Plan PL-07 P11

Affordable Layout Plan PL-08 P11

Storey Height Plan PL-09 P11

Chimney Location Plan PL-10 P11

Adoption Plan PL-11 P11

Developable Area Plan PL-12 P5

Electric Charging Point Plan PL-13 P10

Sinah Lane Housetype Booklet November 2020

Design and Access Statement 2020-03-04 rev P 2020-11-20

Landscape /arboricultural drawings

Landscape masterplan BDWS20660 10M

Soft landscaping BDWS20660 11V

Open Space areas BDWS20660 13B

Public Open space phasing Plan PL-14 P3

LAP proposals BDWS20660 15B

Winter Bird Mitigation Plan BDWS20660 22J

Engineering drawings

Drainage planning layout 10162/102 Rev P1

Levels Planning Layout 10162/101 P1

Highway Layout Review 1 of 2 BSO-E4513-016H

Highway Layout Review 2 of 2 BSO-E4513- 017G

Fire Tender Swept Path Analysis 1 of 2 BSO-E4513-018J

Fire Tender Swept Path Analysis 2 of 2 BSO-E4513 019H

Refuse Vehicle Swept Path Analysis 1 of 2 BSO-E4513-020G

Refuse Vehicle Swept Path Analysis 2 of 2 BSO-E4513-021G

Statements

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment June 2018

Arb Impact Assessment + Method Statement Rev 8 9 Mar 2020

Tree Report BDWS20660trC

Bat Survey Report Nov 2020

Winter Bird Mitigation Strategy Nov 2020

Biodiversity Action Plan June 2018

Biodiversity Checklist June 2018

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey June 2018

Reptile Presence/Likely Absence Report November 2020

Information to inform HRA November 2020

Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment November 2020

Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan V2 November 2020

Flood risk assessment 17134-Rev D

Utilities Assessment June 2018

Soft Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan June 2018

Air Quality Screening Assessment July 2018

Noise Assessment July 2018

Transport Assessment June 2018, supplemented November 2020

Travel Plan July 2019 update November 2020

Economic Benefit Statement June 2018

Landscape Visual Impact Assessment June 2019 revision A

Reason: - To ensure provision of a satisfactory development.

Landscape and materials

3 Notwithstanding the submitted details no above ground development shall take place until a further detailed Scheme of Soft and Hard Landscape Works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include:

i) Written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment,

ii) Planting methods, tree pits & guying methods,

iii) schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate,

iv) Retained areas of grassland cover, scrub, hedgerow, trees and woodland,

v) Manner and treatment of watercourses, ditches and banks,

vi) Details of all hard-surfaces, such as paths, access ways, seating areas and parking spaces, including their appearance, depth and permeability,

vii) Means of enclosure, in particular boundary walls, fencing and planting around properties and including their frontages, including any retaining structures,

viii) The type of street lighting including calculations, contour illumination plans and means to reduce light pollution

ix) A timetable for implementation of the soft and hard landscaping works.

x) Fencing to the proposed links to Hayling Billy Trail and fencing to prevent the creation of unauthorised access.

xi) Specification including detail of size and planting density for the landscaped tree belt along the southern boundary of the bird refuge and northern boundary of the housing site.

The scheme of Soft and Hard Landscaping Works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable. Any plant which dies, becomes diseased or is removed within the first five years of planting, shall be replaced with another of similar type and size, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To achieve an appropriate landscaping scheme to integrate the development into the landscape and mitigate any impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties, and to ensure that the roads, footway, footpath, cycleway, street lighting and surface water drainage are constructed to an appropriate standard to serve the development in accordance with policies DM10, CS12 and CS16 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy 2011) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4 Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no above ground construction works shall take place until samples and a full specification of the materials to be used externally on the buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

Reason: To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory and having due regard to policies CS11 and CS16 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework .

Ecology and trees

5 Development shall proceed in accordance with the ecological mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures detailed within the Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan, Biodiversity Action Plan and Winter Bird Mitigation Strategy (all WYG, November 2020). Ecological enhancement features shall be installed as per ecologists instructions and retained in perpetuity in a location and condition suited to their intended function.

Reason: To provide ecological protection and enhancement in accordance with the Conservation Regulations 2017, Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, NPPF, NERC Act 2006 and Policy CS 11 of the Havant Borough Core Strategy March 2011.

6 Prior to the commencement of development activities a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This CEMP shall include (but not be restricted to): specifications for construction timing and logistics; pollution prevention measures; measures to control surface water run-off and the emission of dust and noise; and specific measures to avoid or mitigate damage and disturbance to species and habitats. The CEMP should clearly detail the roles and responsibilities associated with the protection of the natural environment during construction, and mechanisms for monitoring and reporting.

Reason: To protect biodiversity in accordance with the Conservation Regulations 2017, Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, NPPF, NERC Act 2006 and Policy CS 11 of the Havant Borough Core Strategy March 2011.

7 Prior to the commencement of development activities, a Lighting Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This plan shall include lighting contour modelling and lighting specifications and shall be in accordance with the outline recommendations detailed within the Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan (WYG, November 2020).

Reason: To protect biodiversity in accordance with the Conservation Regulations 2017, Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, the NERC Act (2006), NPPF and Policy CS 11 of the Havant Borough Core Strategy March 2011.

8 Prior to any demolition, construction or groundwork (including exploratory tasks such as archaeological survey digs etc) commencing on the site the approved tree protective measures, including fencing and ground protection, as shown on the approved Tree report ref BDWS20660trC shall be installed and agreed on site with the Arboricultrual Consultant, and within the fenced area(s), there shall be no excavations, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles or fires. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason: To ensure the enhancement of the development by the retention of existing trees and natural features during the construction phase in accordance with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy CS16, of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011.

9 Development shall proceed in strict accordance with the ecological avoidance and mitigation measures detailed within the approved Report to Inform the Habitats Regulations Assessment Stage unless amended under the discharge of details in respect to condition 6 (Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP)) or otherwise amended in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All avoidance and mitigation features shall be permanently retained and maintained in accordance with the agreed details.

Reason: To protect biodiversity in accordance with the Conservation Regulations 2010, Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, the NERC Act (2006), NPPF and Policy CS 11 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011.

Environmental

10 The acoustic mitigation measures to be employed with regard to the building envelope and external amenity areas, including fenestration / ventilation, and fencing /walls for all residential units, shall meet BS8223:2014 standards as recommended for indoor and outdoor ambient noise levels for dwellings, especially in relation to living rooms and bedrooms i.e. during the day (07:00 to 23:00) 35 dB L Aeq,16 hour and at night (23:00 to 07:00) 30 dB L Aeq,8 hour for bedrooms; and external amenity space 50 / 55 dB LAeq,16 hour (50 dB is preferable)

Reason: To ensure the residential amenity of the property is not impacted upon by any external noise levels, especially noise from any commercial / business premises existing alongside the development, traffic noise and noise from pump stations and the like and having regard to Policy CS16 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11 No development shall commence until a Construction Management Plan is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall make comprehensive provisions for:

i) The control of dust setting out the measures for the control of any dust that might emanate from the development site, to include for a suitable and adequate water supply being available at the site prior to works commencing. Furthermore, the methods of dust control should be in accordance with the guidance as laid out in the BRE Report 456 - Control of Dust from Construction and Demolition activities. It should also be noted that besides the keeping of haul roads damp during dry weather conditions, any areas where tracked excavators, dozers and the like are working, are also be kept damp at all times.

ii) Temporary lighting;

iii) No burning on-site;

iv) Scheme of work detailing the extent and type of any piling proposed;

v) A construction-phase drainage system which ensure all surface water passes through three stages of filtration to prevent pollutants from leaving the site;

vi) Safeguards for fuel and chemical storage and use, to ensure no pollution of the surface water leaving the site.

vii) The erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate;

The approved Construction Environmental Management Plan shall be adhered to at all times throughout the construction of the development.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area and of occupants of all nearby residential receptors from pollution and having regard to Policy CS16 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Drainage and Flood risk

12 No development shall begin until a detailed surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on the principles within the approved documentation, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details should include:

a. Confirmation that the attenuation basin low flow channel will not be affected by groundwater either through lining or the provision of groundwater monitoring information.

b. Confirmation of any boundary drainage features to ensure existing flow paths are not bstructed.

c. Details for the long term maintenance arrangements for the surface water drainage system including confirmation that the proposals identified for adoption by Southern Water are acceptable.

Reason: To prevent flooding elsewhere by ensuring that compensatory storage of flood water is provided, to reduce the risk of flooding from blockages to the existing culvert, and to reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants. This condition is required in accordance with Section 9 of the Planning Practice Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) for Flood Risk and Coastal Change and Policy CS15 Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011.

13 No dwellings shall be occupied until the following drainage details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: Details of consent from the Sewerage Authority for a connection to the public sewer for the development. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details

Reason: Without the provision of an appropriate surface water connection point the development cannot be appropriately mitigated and having due regard to policies and proposals CS16 and DM10 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Highways

14 A Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with Hampshire CountyCouncil Highway Authority) before development commences. This should include construction traffic routes and their management and control, parking and turning provision to be made on site, measures to prevent mud being deposited on the highway, adequate provision for addressing any abnormal wear and tear to the highway, and a programme for construction.

Thereafter the approved plan shall be implemented and adhered to throughout the entire construction period.

Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety and to avoid excess soil being deposited on the existing roads and having due regard to policy DM10 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

15 No dwelling hereby permitted shall be first occupied anywhere on the site until the road(s) serving that dwelling have been laid to at least base course.

Reason: To avoid excess soil being deposited on the existing roads and having due regard to policy DM10 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

16 The garages hereby permitted shall be retained and kept available for the parking of cars at all times and shall not be converted to living accommodation.

Reason: To ensure the retention of adequate on-site car parking in the interests of highway safety and residential amenity and having due regard to policies CS16 and DM13 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

17 The car parking, servicing and other vehicular access arrangements shown on the approved plans to serve each individual dwelling hereby permitted shall be made fully available for use prior to that dwelling being first brought into use and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and having due regard to policy DM13 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Archaeology

18 No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological mitigation of impact, based on the results of the trial trenching, in accordance with the approved Written Scheme of Investigation (L-P Archaeology, ref LP3519L-WSI-v1.3, dated March 2020).

Reason: To mitigate the effect of the works associated with the development upon any heritage assets and to ensure that information regarding these heritage assets is preserved by record for future generations and having due regard to Policy CS11 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

19 Following completion of archaeological fieldwork, a report shall be produced in accordance with an approved programme submitted by the developer and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority setting out and securing appropriate post-excavation assessment, specialist analysis and reports, publication and public engagement.

Reason: To contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our past by ensuring that opportunities are taken to capture evidence from the historic environment and to make this publicly available and having due regard to Policy CS11 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Water efficiency/sustainability

20 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until:

(a) A water efficiency calculation in accordance with the Government's National Calculation Methodology for assessing water efficiency in new dwellings has been undertaken which demonstrates that no more than 110 litres of water per person per day shall be consumed within the development, and this calculation has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority; and

(b) All measures necessary to meet the approved water efficiency calculation have been installed.

Reason: There is existing evidence of high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus in the water environment with evidence of eutrophication at some European designated nature conservation sites in the Solent catchment. The PUSH Integrated Water Management Strategy has identified that there is uncertainty as to whether new housing development can be accommodated without having a detrimental impact on the designated sites within the Solent. Further detail regarding this can be found in the appropriate assessment that was carried out regarding this planning application. To ensure that the proposal may proceed as sustainable development, there is a duty upon the local planning authority to ensure that necessary avoidance measures are provided against any impacts which might arise upon the designated sites. In coming to this decision, the Council have had regard to Regulation 63 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, Policy CS11 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and Policy E14 EX1 and E12 of the Pre-Submission Havant Borough Local Plan.

21 At all times following occupation of the development hereby approved, all measures necessary to meet the approved water efficiency calculation shall be maintained so as to ensure that no more than 110 litres per person per day shall be consumed in the development in perpetuity.

Electric Charging points

22 Prior to first occupation of any dwelling with provision for an Electrical Vehicle Charging point full details of the Electrical Vehicle Charging point, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include samples, location and / or a full specification of the materials to be used externally on the buildings. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

Reason: To ensure the appropriate siting of such points and that the appearance of the development is satisfactory and having due regard to policies CS11 and CS16 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011 and Policy IN3 of the Pre-Submission Havant Borough Local Plan 2036 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Other

23 Notwithstanding the submitted Levels Strategy, no development shall take place until details of existing and finished floor and site levels relative to previously agreed off-site datum point(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.

24 Notwithstanding the provisions of any Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order (as amended), no extension, building or structure permitted by Part 1, Classes A and E of the 2015 Order, as amended, shall be erected within the curtilage of Plots 112 to 116 inclusive, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the enhancement of the development by the retention of existing trees and natural features in accordance with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy CS16, of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Core Strategy) 2011.

25 No works, such us percussive piling or works with heavy machinery, that would exceed the noise level of 69dbA or a noise level otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority measured at the sensitive receptor which is the nearest point of the SPA or SPA supporting habitat shall be undertaken during the months of October to March (inclusive.)

Reason: To provide ecological protection and enhancement in accordance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, NERC Act 2006, Policies DM23 and DM24 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Allocations) 2014, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

(The votes recorded for this resolution were:

For: Councillors Guest, Keast, Lowe, Patel, Pike, and Robinson

Against: 0

Abstain: Councillor Mrs Shimbart)

Supporting documents: