Hart District Council Local Plan Strategy and Sites 2016-2032 Proposed Submission Version Hampshire County Council Response –

Hart District Council Local Plan Strategy and Sites 2016-2032 Proposed Submission Version Hampshire County Council Response – March 2018 Subject / Theme Object/ Support / Comments Reasons (Including Proposed Changes / Amendments)

Children’s Services – School Hampshire County Council has a statutory duty to ensure a sufficiency of school places for Hampshire place planning children. Therefore, forecasting of pupil numbers plays a key role in the decision making process around building/extending and even moving educational provision.

The size and diversity of Hampshire creates a number of challenges for meeting the demand for primary and secondary school places. The main principle of current and future provision is that we will seek to provide local schools for local children.

Hampshire County Council Children’s Services continues to work in partnership with Hart District Council to ensure that sufficient school places are made available for local children. On-going capital investment has resulted in a number of high quality primary and secondary school expansions across the district. Hampshire County Council has welcomed the opportunity to comment on the development of Hart's emerging Local Plan and continues to assess how demographic change and new housing will impact on existing education provision before considering the provision of new primary and secondary schools as appropriate. Hampshire County Council is committed to supporting local schools for local children which deliver high quality outcomes whilst retaining a long term viable future.

Hampshire County Council Children’s Services would welcome early engagement with Hart officers regarding the Area of Search and the future potential provision of new primary and secondary schools. The long term viability of a new secondary school is best achieved when meeting the demand from new developments with circa 5000 dwellings. Hampshire County Council Children’s Services also welcomes the provision of land adjacent to Robert Mays, Odiham and Calthorpe Park, Fleet which has been safeguarded for education in the proposed local plan.

Highway Authority Hampshire County Council as the local highway authority has the following comments on the Hart Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2016-2032 proposed submission. HCC is the highway authority for all roads in Hampshire except for motorways and trunk roads and this response is concerned with the potential highway and transportation impacts of the land use proposals set out by Hart District Council (HDC) on the local road network. In this context the primary focus of the HCC as local highway authority is to:

 Maintain the function of the M3 / A30 / A327 / A287 / A33 / A3013 / A323 and their junctions for strategic connectivity;  Maintain and improve the safety and capacity of the local transport corridors linking local communities to the M3 / A30 / A327 / A287 / A33 / A3013 / A323;  Continue to work with utility providers to ensure the highway network is resilient;  Promote access to local services and facilities by the sustainable transport modes of walking, cycling and public transport with links to existing networks; and  Ensure that the Hampshire Local Transport Plan objectives are translated in to the Local Plans and their supporting documents.

Transport Assessment HCC officers have co-operated with HDC, and is supportive of the use of the strategic model, known as the North Hampshire Transport Model (NHTM), to assess the wider transport impacts of the strategic disposition of proposed development across the District. It should be noted that the use of the NHTM and its accompanying Transport Assessment (TA) is focused at a strategic level and intended to identify potential strategic transport infrastructure obstacles to successful delivery of the development levels proposed in the local plan review in combination. This response is therefore not concerned with the localised traffic and transportation impacts of each development site which will need to be assessed by individual site TAs that can be prepared in the full knowledge of the details of each site and its surroundings.

Notwithstanding the above, the purpose of the TA is to identify the key locations on the highway network where the impacts of local plan development (as predicted by the NHTM) require a focus for further investigation and for the identification of potential mitigation measures to deal with the severe impacts of growth. HCC acknowledges that this work does not look to rectify existing highway concerns across the district, but focuses on those junction / links which are made worse by the addition of local plan development traffic.

HCC are working with HDC to refine the TA. The County Council’s qualified support for the Hart Local Plan should therefore be read in conjunction with the jointly prepared Statement of Common Ground (SoCG).

HCC recommends that the Statement of Common Ground should cover the following topics:

 Land uses included within the NHTM;  Methodology applied for determining the impacts of local plan development traffic;  Additional analysis;

 Mitigation schemes and their costings;  The reasons for the different mitigation scheme proposed at M3 Junction 4a, in the Hart Local Plan TA and the Rushmoor Local Plan TA.

Distribution and Quantum of Development The development strategy in this plan period is to focus growth in defined settlements and on previously developed land in sustainable locations. The Highway Authority supports a development strategy that locates housing allocations either:

 near existing services and facilities which can be readily accessed by walking and cycling or public transport facilities or where, if such facilities are missing these can be adequately provided and funded through development; or  within a major development area that is of a sufficient scale to provide local essential services and facilities.

This approach ensures that the housing sites are accessible by sustainable modes of transport (walking, cycling and public transport) and minimises the need for trips by motor vehicles and in particular the harmful impacts of traffic on human health and environmentally sensitive environments in accordance with the Local Transport Plan objectives.

The largest single allocation in this plan period is the brownfield development at Hartland Park bordering Rushmoor Borough. In transport terms this is not considered to be an immediately sustainable location without significant investment directed toward the highway and sustainable transport network.

HCC therefore recommend that the wording of Policy SS1 is amended to reflect this position more accurately.

The Highway Authority welcomes HDCs approach to planning for the future plan period in defining an “area of interest” in Murrell Green / Winchfield, and requests active involvement in the planning of the settlement to ensure that highway capacity and the opportunities for sustainable transport are considered at the Master planning stage for a comprehensive and integrated development. There are known pinch points on the highway and rail network in this part of the district which will require careful consideration. The County Council therefore recommends that a joint infrastructure master plan is prepared. In the planning of this development it is imperative that infrastructure and service requirements are identified and planned at the earliest possible opportunity. This will help to ensure that the development has the necessary services in

locations that can support a sustainable community i.e. reducing the need to travel by car and increasing the opportunities to travel by walking, cycling and public transport. The use of innovation within the future settlement is noted, and our recommendation is that this should be in accordance with relevant HCC policy. HCC acknowledges that HDC is expecting to deliver more housing than the indicative Government figures for Hart requires and has the potential to deliver more growth with the proposals in the Murrell Green / Winchfield area. It is yet to be determined whether Hart will be required to take up a housing shortfall from Surrey Heath. If this situation were to arise, and housing numbers changed from that assessed in the strategic modelling, then HCC may request additional TA work to be undertaken.

HCC will continue to work with HDC to assist in with the satisfactory completion of the Local Plan TA and complete a SoCG.

Highway Authority Hampshire County Council as the local Highway Authority would like to make the following suggested amendments to some wording in the Local Plan as set out below:

Para Hart Local Plan text Highway Authority comments / suggested ammendments 74-77 There should be a reference to the work which HCCs School Travel Plan team provide to schools within the District to assist with increasing travel to school by sustainable modes of transport i.e. Walking & Cycling. 93 “There will have been investment in Remove ‘our’ from text as roads are our roads to tackle congestion and typically HCC / Highways England make them safer, and in measures to encourage walking, cycling and the “There will have been investment in our use of public transport.” roads to tackle congestion and make them safer, and in measures to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport.”

94.10 “To maximise opportunities for the This will be difficult to achieve. HCC Would

provision of sustainable transport suggest removing “with priority given to the infrastructure that supports new improvement of sustainable transport development, including facilities for options” from this text and replacing it with walking, cycling and public transport, the suggested text as set out below: and the delivery of measures to minimise, or mitigate the impact of A package of improvements which includes new development on the existing provision for sustainable transport is network with priority given to the considered to the best option for mitigating improvement of sustainable transport impact on the existing network. options” 98 “Development will be focused within HCC Suggest that an amendment is made defined settlements, on previously to the text to reflect the statement raised developed land in sustainable above by the Local Highway Authority that locations…” Hartland Park is not considered a sustainable location in transport terms without significant mitigation. 145 “…innovative sustainable transport The innovative and sustainable transport solutions” solutions would still need to be acceptable to the Local Highway Authority. e “Deliver innovative and forward – The innovative and sustainable transport thinking solutions and technology to solutions would still need to be acceptable design, transport issues….” to the Local Highway Authority.

l Supported by a transport HCC as the Local Highway Authority assessment and strategy, together request that Hart DC add some additional with an infrastructure delivery plan text here specifying “the need for a Travel that ensures the necessary Plan and a joint infrastructure master plan”. supporting infrastructure is delivered in a timely fashion and promotes sustainable transport modes;

154 The innovative and sustainable transport

solutions would still need to be acceptable to the Local Highway Authority. 392 “The Plan seeks to improve HCC suggest that the text is amended to: accessibility through the three initiative to reduce, manage and “The Plan seeks to improve accessibility invest” through the three initiative of reduce, manage and invest” 395 (f) “do not have a severe impact on the HCC suggest that the text is amended to: operation, safety or accessibility to the local or strategic highway “do not have a severe impact on the networks;” operation, safety or accessibility of the local or strategic highway networks;”

396 See above comment. Disabilities may be physical or mental health related e.g. dementia

Highway Authority Highway Authority Comments on the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP)

The Highway Authority note the following inconsistencies between the IDP and the site specific section 106 agreements.

Netherhouse Copse S106

 Fleet Road (a323) with Aldershot Road and signage from reading road south to M3 junction 4a – Not in S106  £750k towards Improvements works to A30/Griffin Way roundabout, Hook – This is in the NE Hook S106

NE Hook

 Should include £750k towards Improvements works to A30/Griffin Way roundabout, Hook, as incorrectly referenced for Netherhouse Copse.

Watery Lane, Church Crookham S106

 Oatsheaf Junction – Not in S106  Improvements to cycle route 11 from Hart Leisure Centre to Elvetham Heath – Not in S106

£5k secured by a S106 agreement for development land at Odiham Road, Riseley – This is £13k

£236k has been secured from the S106 agreement for the development of and at High Ridge Farm, Newnham Road, Hook

 Wayfinding tools within the village centre of Hook

Policy I4: Open Space, Sport The County Council supports the intentions of Policy I4, but are concerned that the wording of the policy and Recreation does not allow sufficient flexibility to secure future improvements to education facilities during the plan period.

This requirement is in compliance with paragraph 72 of the NPPF, which states that “the government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities.” Where central government funding is not available, the only way that education improvements can be funded is through developer contributions and through the disposal of surplus land within school sites.

The County Council is only able to promote the disposal of surplus school facilities for alternative development where it can be demonstrated under Section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act (1998) that the land is surplus to the requirements of both the subject school and other Local Education Authority (LEA) schools within the local area, and that the proceeds from the sale of the surplus land is re- invested by the LEA into education, sport and/or recreational facilities. Section 77 is therefore a process that would be consistent with the intentions of Policy I4 and the County Council recommends that the wording for Policy I4 is amended to be consistent with Section 77.

In some cases schools may need to expand onto existing playing fields and therefore criteria c) should support this.

HCC request that the additional supporting text is added (as set out below) to Policy I4:

Section 77 of the Schools Standards and Frameworks Act 1998 sets out strict criteria to control the release of school playing fields for development, including requirements that the proceeds are used to enhance sports and/or education provision. Hampshire County Council may seek the development of school playing fields to rationalise its land holdings as a means of financing recreational and educational improvements, in accordance with the requirements of Section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998.

c) the development is for alternative sports and recreational or educational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.

Policy I5: Community Facilities The County Council as a public service provider has an on-going need to review and, if necessary, rationalise surplus facilities as part of wider County Council strategies to improve local services in the community. Such County Council services include ‘Children’s Services’ (pre-school through to the 14-19 year age group), ‘Adult Services’ (catering for those with learning disabilities, mental health, older people, and persons with physical disabilities), and ‘Community and Cultural Services’ (libraries, museums, sports, recreation, tourism).

The County Council would like to emphasise its statutory function to provide public services, and to remain effective in meeting this commitment, the County Council will be implementing a series of service-driven improvements, covering both frontline and support services. This may sometimes result in the ‘necessary loss’ of particular community buildings and land in County Council ownership, in order to reinvest proceeds of sale in local service improvements.

HCC request that the additional text is added (as set out below) to Policy 15:

The County Council would therefore suggest the following addition to Policy I5 to reinforce the unique role of public service providers and recognise the need for managed change to achieve service improvements over time.

iii) The proposals are part of a service provider’s plans to re-provide or enhance local services in equally accessible locations.

Countryside access / Public Hampshire County Council Countryside Service requests the following amendments to some paragraphs Rights of Way within the Local Plan and set out the suggested amendments below:

92. (13) To protect and enhance the District’s green infrastructure and the public rights of way network;

93. There will have been investment in our roads and the public rights of way network to tackle congestion and make them safer, and in measures to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport.

94. 10. To maximise opportunities for the provision of sustainable transport infrastructure that supports new development, including facilities for walking, cycling and public transport, and the delivery of measures to minimise, or mitigate the impact of new development on the existing highway, open access and public rights of way network with priority given to the improvement of sustainable transport options.

94. 13. To promote healthy and sustainable local communities through protecting and enhancing community, sport, health, cultural, recreation and leisure facilities, and the public rights of way network through the delivery of a multi-functional green infrastructure network across the District.

373. Green Infrastructure: Waterways, parks, natural and semi natural spaces, outdoor sports facilities, allotments, play areas, wildlife corridors/footpaths, rights of way and green roofs.

384. Green Infrastructure (GI) is defined as “A network of multifunctional green space, urban and rural, which is capable of delivering a wide range of environmental and quality of life benefits for local communities. Green Infrastructure is not simply an alternative description for conventional open space. As a network it includes parks, open spaces, playing fields, woodlands and rights of way but also street trees, allotments and private gardens. It can also include streams, canals and other water bodies and features such as green roofs and walls.”

389. Green infrastructure provided on site should be designed to be multifunctional and planned holistically alongside other policy requirements for open space and recreation, biodiversity, landscaping, flood risk and sustainable drainage. Opportunities should also be taken to contribute to the aims of the Green Infrastructure Strategy, for example improving connectivity within the wider green infrastructure network and connecting existing green infrastructure assets, including public rights of way. For developments close to major transport routes, particularly the M3 motorway and railway lines, blocks of woodland may need to be planted to serve as a buffer for noise and air pollution.

HCC Countryside Service also request the following amendments to the proposed policies:

Policy SS2 Hartland Village HCC welcome point j) which seeks to promote Southwood (SINC) and Basingstoke Canal (SSSI), both of which are HCC Countryside Sites, which are within close proximity of this development site. HCC also welcome point k) which promote sustainable travel, rights of way enhancements, and the protection of Basingstoke Canal. However HCC request the following amendment to ensure that equestrian users, and Fleet Bridleway 725 which adjoins the site, are protected and enhanced: k) Provide mitigation for impacts on the local highway network, footpaths, cycleways and bridleways (including the Basingstoke Canal) and promote sustainable transport. This will include measures to connect the site with Fleet, Fleet Station and Farnborough by sustainable transport modes;

Policy SS3 New Settlement at the Murrell Green/Winchfield Area of Search HCC have previously provided comments on this proposal, regarding concerns over the impact upon the Basingstoke Canal, and the rights of way network. We welcome that a Green Infrastructure Strategy, a New Settlement DPD and a masterplan will be drawn up for this area, and request to be consulted on all of these documents.

HCC also request the following amendments to this policy: h) Promote health and wellbeing and self-containment by providing the necessary supporting infrastructure including green infrastructure, community facilities, employment, education, retail and health care services, connected by an active travel network; i) Supported by a transport assessment and strategy, a public rights of way improvement strategy, and an infrastructure delivery plan that ensures the necessary supporting infrastructure is delivered in a timely fashion and promotes sustainable transport modes;

Policy H3 Rural Exception Sites HCC request that an additional criteria (as set out below) is included within this policy to protect and enhance rights of way on or near to rural exception sites: e) they protect and enhance the local rights of way network

Policy H5 Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople HCC request that the below point is included within this policy to protect and enhance rights of way on or near to traveller sites: k) they protect and enhance the local rights of way network

Policy NBE1 Development in the Countryside HCC request that the below point is included within this policy to protect and enhance rights of way on or near to countryside developments: l) they protect and enhance the local rights of way network

Policy ED2 Safeguarding Employment Land and Premises The southern part of the designation for the Blackbushe Business Park, Yateley is within Yateley Country Park, which is an HCC Site and a registered common. The Countryside Service is concerned about the inclusion of part of Yately Country Park within the proposed allocation, and requests that Hart District Council contact us to discuss this allocation in more detail.

Policy ED3 The Rural Economy HCC request that the below point is included within this policy to protect and enhance rights of way on or near to countryside developments:

All development proposals must be of a use and scale that is appropriate to the site and location when considering: iv. the impact on the local highway and rights of way network including the type of traffic generated, the appropriateness for the local highway network to accommodate the development and the impact on their character.

Policy NBE2 Gaps between Settlements HCC welcome this policy for helping to protect access to the countryside, and agree with paragraph 274 of the supporting text which discusses the importance of Public Rights of Way between settlements.

Policy NBE5 Biodiversity HCC support this policy.

Policy NBE6 Managing Flood Risk HCC welcome point e) which seeks, amongst other waterways, would protect the integrity of the Basingstoke Canal.

Policy NBE10 Design HCC request the following amendment to this proposal: b) it provides or positively contributes to public spaces, access routes and public rights of way that are attractive, safe and inclusive for all users, including families, disabled people and the elderly, and provides a net gain for biodiversity, where possible;

Policy I2 Green Infrastructure HCC request that public rights of way are referred too within this chapter.

Policy I3 Transport HCC welcome this policy, but request the following amendments, particularly with regard to point h):

Development should offer maximum flexibility in the choice of travel modes, including promote the use of sustainable transport modes prioritising walking and cycling, improve accessibility to services and support the transition to a low carbon future. h) protect and where possible enhance access to public rights of way subject to compliance with other relevant policies.

Policy I4 Open space, sport and recreation HCC request the following amendment to this policy:

Where open space or other facilities are provided on site they should be well located, connected to sustainable travel routes, and designed with appropriate management arrangements in place.

Policy I8 Safeguarded Land for Education HCC have no objection to this allocation, but do request that Odiham Footpath 7, and Fleet Footpath 503, which run alongside the Robert May’s School and Calthorpe Park School sites respectively, are protected, and where possible enhanced.