Public Document Pack

To: All Members of the Council

Dear Councillor

Council Thursday, 27 May 2021

Your attendance is requested at part two of the Annual Meeting of the Council (selection) on:

Date: Thursday, 27 May 2021 Time: 7.45 pm Place: The Haymarket, Wote Street, , RG21 7NW

Yours sincerely

Russell O’Keefe Chief Executive

For more information please contact the Democratic Services team: 01256 844844 Or email: [email protected] Visit: www.basingstoke.gov.uk/meetings

Page 1 Chief Executive Russell O’Keefe Executive Director of Borough Development and Deputy Chief Executive Ian Boll Executive Director of Residents Services Rebecca Emmett BSc (Hons), AIEMA Executive Director of Corporate Services (Section 151 Officer) Sue Cuerden CPFA ACMA

COMMITTEE PAPERS If you need this information in a different format, such as large print, please contact Democratic Services.

Alternatively all documents associated with this agenda can be accessed through the Council’s website on www.basingstoke.gov.uk/meetings

WEBCASTING The open proceedings of the meeting will be webcast live and can be viewed through the Borough Council’s website at https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/webcast

Webcasts of previous meetings can be viewed through the following link https://www.youtube.com/user/BasingstokeGov

Page 2

AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL

Members are encouraged to obtain any points of clarification on the reports on the Agenda in advance of the meeting.

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

3. MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS HELD ON 25 FEBRUARY 2021 AND 7 - 40 18 MARCH 2021

The Chair will move that the minutes of the meetings be signed as a correct record. The only part of the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

4. ANNOUNCEMENTS

5. ELECTION OF THE LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

To elect a Leader of the Council for a four year term.

6. MEMBERSHIP OF CABINET

To note those Councillors appointed by the Leader as Members of the Cabinet including the Deputy Leader.

7. ALLOCATION OF SEATS TO POLITICAL GROUPS 41 - 48

To advise Council of the calculations relating to the allocation of seats in accordance with the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 following the borough elections on 6 May 2021.

8. APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES

To appoint Members of the Council to the following Committees for the Council year 2021/22 in accordance with the wishes of political groups, together with standing panels of substitute members:

1) Scrutiny Committee 2) Economic Planning and Housing Committee 3) Community Environment and Partnerships Committee 4) Manydown Overview Committee 5) Development Control Committee 6) Licensing Committee

Page 3

7) Human Resources Committee 8) Audit and Accounts Committee 9) Standards Committee 10) Investigating and Disciplinary Committee (IDC)

9. ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CHAIRS

To elect Chairs of the following Committees for the Council year 2021/22 in accordance with the Committee Procedure Rules:

1) Scrutiny Committee 2) Economic Planning and Housing Committee 3) Community Environment and Partnerships Committee 4) Manydown Overview Committee 5) Development Control Committee 6) Licensing Committee 7) Human Resources Committee 8) Audit and Accounts Committee 9) Standards Committee 10) Investigating and Disciplinary Committee (IDC)

Note: Vice-Chairs will be appointed by Committees at their first available meeting after the annual meeting of the Council.

10. APPOINTMENT TO JOINT BODIES

To make appointments to the following:-

1) Joint Manydown Committee

To appoint 4 Members.

The Membership to comprise of Cabinet Members and Members from the following Wards, and Buckskin, Oakley and the Candovers, and , and Manydown.

For information the current Members are Councillors Izett, Eachus, Freeman and T Robinson.

2) Crime and Disorder Joint Scrutiny Committee

To appoint 3 Members to a joint Scrutiny Committee (comprising Hart, Rushmoor and ).

The membership to consist of 2 Conservatives and 1 Labour Councillor, to provide balance across the 3 authorities.

For information the current Member is Councillor Miller.

Page 4

3) Police and Crime Panel

To appoint the main representative and a Deputy to the panel.

For information the current main representative is Councillor Bound.

4) PATROL (Parking and Traffic Regulations Outside London) Adjudication joint Committee.

To appoint 1 Member.

For information the current Member is Councillor Edwards.

11. APPOINTMENT TO OUTSIDE BODIES 49 - 52

To make appointments to Outside Bodies. (As in previous years it is hoped that a largely agreed list of appointments will be available to Full Council on 27 May 2021, with votes only required where agreement has not been reached).

12. ADOPTION OF THE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD 53 - 120 PLAN

Report of the Head of Planning, Sustainability and Infrastructure

13. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

To consider whether, in view of the nature of the remaining items on the agenda, any of them are likely to involve the disclosure of exempt or confidential information within the terms of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972

14. CONFIDENTIAL/EXEMPT ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

Page 5

This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 3

Minutes of the Council meeting held on Thursday, 25 February 2021 in Virtual Meeting - Zoom Webinar, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council at 6.30 pm

Members of the Council in attendance: Councillor D Taylor (Chair), Councillor C Ashfield, Councillor R Bean, Councillor M Bound, Councillor S Bound, Councillor T Capon, Councillor K Carruthers, Councillor J Cousens, Councillor O Cubitt, Councillor H Eachus, Councillor L Edwards, Councillor G Falconer, Councillor A Freeman, Councillor J Frankum, Councillor P Frankum, Councillor S Frost, Councillor R Gardiner, Councillor P Gaskell, Councillor D George, Councillor S Godesen, Councillor H Golding, Councillor S Grant, Councillor P Harvey, Councillor R Hickling, Councillor R Hussey, Councillor J Izett, Councillor T Jones, Councillor G James, Councillor L James, Councillor C Kinnear, Councillor A Konieczko, Councillor D Leeks, Councillor W Lovegrove, Councillor S Mahaffey, Councillor A McCormick, Councillor J McKay, Councillor P Miller, Councillor C Phillimore, Councillor D Potter, Councillor D Putty, Councillor C Regan, Councillor K Rhatigan, Councillor N Robinson, Councillor T Robinson, Councillor M Ruffell, Councillor C Sanders, Councillor E Still, Councillor K Taylor, Councillor M Taylor, Councillor I Tilbury, Councillor C Tomblin, Councillor J Vaux, Councillor G Watts, Councillor J Westbrook, Councillor M Westbrook and Councillor C Wooldridge

66/20 Apologies for absence

Apologies were received from Councillors Cooper, Keating and Reid.

67/20 Declarations of interest

Councillor Still declared an interest in relation to agenda item 8 with regards to The Anvil as in her role as a county councillor she sat on the board of the Anvil Trust as an observer.

68/20 Minutes of the meeting held on 17 December 2020

The Minutes of the meeting held on 17 December 2020 were confirmed as an accurate record and signed by the Mayor.

69/20 Announcements

Tributes were paid to former Mayor Lynden Jones following his sad death.

The Mayor welcomed the new Chief Executive, Russell O’Keefe, to his first meeting of Council.

70/20 Questions from members of the public

Question 1

From: Miranda Chubb

Page 7 I support agenda item 15 on Eco Housing. Ensuring new buildings are zero-carbon is incredibly important to enable us to meet our own 2030 carbon neutral target. In fact, the UK Committee on Climate Change stated that the UK’s legally-binding climate change targets will not be met without the near-complete elimination of greenhouse gas emissions from UK buildings. They have advised that all councils and developers need to play their part to achieve this (CCC, 2019). Ideally no new buildings (domestic or commercial) should be constructed in the borough, unless they are zero carbon and have provision for renewable energy generation. It is also much cheaper to design and build houses to be zero-carbon than to have to pay to retrofit them in the future.

As well as the excellent Parc Eirin development please may I ask that the detailed study also reviews the Nailsea North Somerset Council project. These homes have been designed to environmentally sustainable Passivhaus standards and have onsite renewable energy generation. This development also includes protection and biodiversity enhancement of the public woodland and bridleway corridor. Please would it also be possible to consider nature recovery networks and the impact on biodiversity and level of tree cover in future Basingstoke property developments.

As well as ensuring that new sources of emissions are minimised, the UK Committee on Climate Change advises that we must also take urgent action to reduce emissions from existing buildings. So, may I ask that there is also a similar eco housing study to review options and develop a plan to retrofit existing buildings within the borough to make them as energy efficient as possible and provide them with renewable sources of heat and electricity? As well as the challenge/opportunity of the new significant house building within the Borough we also have the challenge/opportunity of the existing housing (and commercial buildings) within the borough which need to be retrofitted to net zero standards.

Answer – Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment

Can I thank Miranda Chubb for her well thought through question to us. I agree with what she says, putting it shortly. I agree with what she says about item 15, the motion. I agree that we should look at the various projects that have been set up elsewhere in the country to see whether what they can do we can do. I agree that we need policies that reflect the direction of travel which has a degree of urgency about it and I can reassure her, and I know members know this already, that as part of both our Climate Change Strategy and as part of the Local Plan Update, we are designing policies that will bring to bear the questions and thoughts that she has put together for us and I would like this question to be forwarded to that policy MAP and the Climate Change MAP for them to consider further what she says so that these matters can be looked into. I can’t obviously say today that any one of those schemes is the right one for us and I am not being asked to do that for obvious sensible reasons but what I am being asked to do is to assure that we will be looking at these schemes to see if they could be appropriate for us and I agree that we should. I should just of course remind Miranda Chubb and members that we are somewhat constrained by what the evidence says we are allowed to do. If there is a need for these things we have to build an evidence base that supports it and of course we have to get approval from a planning inspector, so it is not a question of use setting the standard. Its takes time for these things to happen, there has to be

Page 8 an evidence base to support it. Thank you for the question.

Question 2

From: Alex Lee

At the full council meeting of Thursday 15th October 2020, the Labour Group of Councillors successfully brought and passed a motion, the first of many in the country to do so, that asked the council leader(s) to write to The Prime Minister, The Minister of State for Immigration, The Minister of State for Veterans Affairs and MPs Maria Miller, Rani Jayawardena and Kit Malthouse outlining this councils support for all Commonwealth and Nepalese Veterans who have served a minimum of 4 years to be granted the automatic and free of charge right to remain in the UK, and that any veteran who completes 12 years of service to be automatically given British Citizenship.

Can Cllr Rhatigan confirm when he wrote to all those mentioned, if he has received any response from them and the output of any of those responses as I am aware that other councils that passed this motion after this council have started to receive responses.

Answer – The Leader of the Council

As with many things in life, this has slipped through the net and the letter has not been written. I could have written it today and pretended it had gone and we had not had a reply. As a member of the forces you will know that there are two main reasons for things not happening as they should, firstly conspiracy and secondly cock-up. I am afraid on this occasion it is the latter. I have spoken to executive support today, the letter will be ready for me tomorrow to sign and send and in addition I will phone the three MP’s to stress upon them that this is important. As a councillor who has a child going to Afghanistan in March with the RAF it is important to me that ex-serviceman’s rights are maintained and especially those who do not have the privilege initially of being born in the UK. I will try my best to ensure that those recommendations from you for the motion that Labour rightly had the support of most of the council, are acted upon and as soon as I get a reply I will have his email and send him those replies.

Question 3

From: Martin Heath

A number of other local authorities for example have imposed stricter planning rules on developers that require them to build to a better standard than the general building rules. For example Merton Council have the “Merton Rule” which requires developers to install renewable energy systems in new buildings.

Given the amount of new development in the borough eg Manydown, Basing View, Junction 7, and Popham will the Council consider the use of these types of planning conditions on developers in Basingstoke? And if not why not given the declared intent to be carbon neutral by 2030.”

Page 9

Answer: Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment

The fact is that we are going through a Local Plan Update at the current moment which will consider all of these things. I thank the questioner for the recommendation to look at the ‘Merton Rule’ and we should do so. I hope this question will be put before the MAP that will be dealing with climate change policy and building design that we will be looking at later this year. We need evidence before we can simply change the rules, as I said to the previous questioner. We can’t just introduce policies without developing a clear and justifiable evidence base which also considers the impacts on viability, that we have consulted on the policies and tested them through examination of their soundness with the input of a planning inspector. So whilst it may well be that we will get to the point where such a rule might be appropriate for us, I can’t give the commitment that there is going to be that today for obvious reasons, but I can commit to the fact that we should certainly look at it and it should shape our discussions as whether it is appropriate or other similar rules are the ‘Basingstoke rule’. Maybe the way to go is something that is defined by us that works for us. We have designed policies in the past that have worked for us and have been approved by planning inspectors that perhaps other local planning authorities don’t have and I see no reason why we should not be bold and do that for the future.

71/20 Petitions

There were no petitions.

72/20 Resignations and appointments

No resignations or appointments were made to committees and outside bodies.

73/20 Medium Term Financial Strategy and Budget Update Report 2021/22 to 2024/25

Council considered a report which provided a summary of the Cabinet’s revenue budget proposals for 2021/22 together with a financial forecast for 2022/23, 2023/24 and 2024/25 and presented a balanced revenue budget for 2021/22. It also provided the Chief Finance Officers statutory statements on the robustness of the estimates, adequacy of reserves and estimate of business rate income for the Business Rate Retention Scheme and set out the formal 2020/21 Council Tax Resolution and Council Tax.

Group leaders were invited to give their annual budget speeches to the council which covered a wide range of issues.

The Leader of the Council moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Golding.

Councillor Golding seconded by Councillor T Robinson moved the following amendment:

To amend the income generation proposal increases to the collection charges for

Page 10 Green Garden Waste in 2021/22. To remove the income generation proposal for above inflationary increases to the Bulky Household Waste charges in 2021/22 and across all years of the MTFS. Further review work to be completed that will then inform any further changes from 2022/23. This is to be funded from the planned contribution to the MTFS risk reserve from additional New Homes Bonus grant that has been allocated for 2021/22 and will increase the budget gap in 2022/23, 2023/24 and 2024/25. Proposed and amended 2021/22 Green Garden and Bulky Waste Fees and Charges:

2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 Budget Proposal £M £M £M £M Reduced income from amending proposed Green Garden Waste 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 Charges Withdraw above inflationary increases to Bulky Household 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 Waste

Funded by Reduction in New Homes Bonus allocation to (0.23) 0.00 0.00 0.00 MTFS Risk Reserve

Impact on Budget Gap - Increase 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06

The amendment was debated. Whilst some members were supportive of the amendment to reduce the proposed increase in charges for green garden waste and bulky household waste, other members considered that it was a temporary measure to reduce the increase in charges for a year and money should be diverted from the New Homes Bonus to ensure there were no increase in charges. Increased fly tipping was also raised as a concern.

The amendment was put to the meeting and carried upon a vote of FOR 34, AGAINST 0, ABSTAINED 22

Councillor McCormick, seconded by Councillor K Taylor moved the following amendment regarding withdrawal of the shuttle bus service and charges for waste containers and bulky and garden waste removal:

To remove the following income generation and saving proposals and add an additional pressure for one year only in 2021/22 to enable further review work to be completed that will then inform any further changes across the future years of the MTFS. This is to be funded from the planned contribution to the MTFS risk reserve from additional New Homes Bonus grant that has been allocated for 2021/22.

Page 11 Budget Proposal 2021/22 £M Withdrawal of the Centre Shuttle Service 0.09 Increases in Charges for Waste Containers, Bulky Household 0.29 Waste and Garden Waste

New Pressure Removal of current Wheeled Bin charges 0.05

Total Increase Budget Requirement 0.43

Funded by Reduction in New Homes Bonus allocation to (0.43) MTFS Risk Reserve

The amendment was fully debated. Comments were made in support of retaining the shuttle bus service as valued public transport for local residents, it provided access to the town centre and leisure park and the use of public transport should be encouraged particularly in light of a climate emergency. Other members considered that the service was not serving local residents but as a means to access the station, passenger numbers had declined and that mass rapid transport and a green sustainable bus service was the way forward.

Comments were also made in support of retaining wheeled bin charges as it encouraged recycling and concessions were available to those on benefits. Members in support of the amendment raised concerns regarding the increase in the charge for replacement bins and that bins could be bought cheaper elsewhere. Comment was also made regarding reducing the garden waste charges however there was a significant amount of residents who did not have gardens however the proposed cost of parking permits was significantly being increased which would effect a considerable amount of residents.

The amendment was put to the meeting and upon a vote of FOR 18, AGAINST 29, ABSTAINED 9 the amendment was rejected.

The substantive motion as amended was fully debated. Some Members made comment in support of the recommendations and officers were praised for the work undertaken to deliver a balanced budget particularly in response to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Other members made comments which included concerns regarding cuts to the culture and communities’ budget, lack of aspiration or vision within the budget, staff redundancies, rural car park charges, and revival of the top of town.

After the debate a recorded vote was taken in two parts. For recommendations 1 – 14 there voted FOR 30, AGAINST 16, ABSTAINED 10. For recommendation 15 there voted FOR 32, AGAINST 9, ABSTAINED 15. The recommendations were carried.

Resolved: That Council

Note:

Page 12

1) The S151 Officer’s (Executive Director of Corporate Services) statutory report regarding the robustness of the estimates and the adequacy of reserves detailed in section 13 of the report.

2) That the Executive Director of Corporate Services (S151 Officer) on the 8 January 2021 calculated the Council Tax base for the whole Council area at 66,627.2 Band D equivalents and for dwellings in those parts of its area to which a parish precept relates as per Appendix 2.

3) The county, police and fire authority precepts detailed in Appendix 3. That as the billing authority, the Council has not been notified by any major precepting authority that its relevant basic amount of Council Tax for 2021/22 is excessive and the billing authority is therefore not required to hold a referendum, in accordance with section 52ZK of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

4) The risks and sensitivities within the financial forecasts highlighted in section 10 and in Appendix 5.

Determine:

5) That for the purposes of section 35 (2) (d) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, any expenses incurred by the Borough Council in the financial year 2021/22 in performing functions in a part of the district which elsewhere in the district are performed by a Parish Council, shall not be special expenses of the Borough Council.

6) That its relevant basic amount of Council Tax for 2021/22 (£131.42 at Band D) reflects a £5.00 (3.96%) increase which is not excessive in accordance with principles approved under Section 52ZB of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

Approve:

7) The net Council Tax requirement of £8.76M for 2021/22, the revenue estimates including the budget proposals in section 6 and contributions to and from reserves as summarised in sections 7 and 9.

8) The Medium Term Financial Strategy, as shown in Appendix 1.

9) The updated financial policies set out in Appendix 4 including the revised New Homes Bonus Grant allocation policy.

10) That the requirement for Council Tax for Borough purposes for 2021/22 be £131.42 Band D equivalent as set out in Appendix 3.

11) The 2021/22 net income budget of £0.08M for the Joint Manydown Committee as set out in section 15 and that the net income is shared equally between the Council and Hampshire County Council.

Page 13 12) The Council Tax Resolution as set out in Appendix 3 which brings together the Borough’s Council Tax Requirement and that of the other major preceptors (Hampshire County Council, Hampshire Fire and Rescue and The Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire) and sets the Council Tax charges for 2021/22.

13) That the S151 Officer (Executive Director of Corporate Services) be given delegated authority to implement any variation necessary to the overall level of 2021/22 Council Taxes in the event that any of the precepting authorities change their precept calculation from that expected and reported at the Council meeting.

14) The updated Financial Regulations as detailed in Appendix 7 for inclusion in the council’s constitution.

15) The Priority Plans and updated Council Plan as shown in Appendices 8 and 9.

Amendment 1 - Green Garden and Bulk Waste Charges (Amendment) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Abstain Councillor Rebecca Bean Yes Councillor Michael Bound Abstain Councillor Simon Bound Yes Councillor Tony Capon Yes Councillor Kerri Carruthers Yes Councillor Jack Cousens Yes Councillor Onnalee Cubitt Yes Councillor Hayley Eachus Yes Councillor Laura Edwards Yes Councillor Graham Falconer Yes Councillor Angie Freeman Abstain Councillor Jane Frankum Abstain Councillor Paul Frankum Abstain Councillor Stuart Frost Yes Councillor Roger Gardiner Yes Councillor Paul Gaskell Yes Councillor Dave George Yes Councillor Sven Godesen Yes Councillor Hannah Golding Yes Councillor Stephanie Grant Abstain Councillor Paul Harvey Yes Councillor Ryan Hickling Abstain Councillor Ronald Hussey Abstain Councillor John Izett Yes Councillor Tony Jones Abstain Councillor Gavin James Abstain Councillor Laura James Yes Councillor Clare Kinnear Yes Councillor Andy Konieczko Abstain Councillor David Leeks Yes

Page 14 Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Abstain Councillor Simon Mahaffey Yes Councillor Andrew McCormick Abstain Councillor John McKay Abstain Councillor Paul Miller Yes Councillor Colin Phillimore Abstain Councillor David Potter Abstain Councillor Dan Putty Yes Councillor Colin Regan Abstain Councillor Ken Rhatigan Yes Councillor Nicholas Robinson Yes Councillor Tristan Robinson Yes Councillor Mark Ruffell Yes Councillor Clive Sanders Yes Councillor Elaine Still Yes Councillor Diane Taylor Yes Councillor Kim Taylor Abstain Councillor Mark Taylor Abstain Councillor Ian Tilbury Abstain Councillor Chris Tomblin Yes Councillor Jenny Vaux Yes Councillor Gary Watts Abstain Councillor Janet Westbrook Yes Councillor Michael Westbrook Yes Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge Abstain Carried Amendment 2 - Waste Charges and Shuttle Bus (Amendment) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Abstain Councillor Rebecca Bean No Councillor Michael Bound Abstain Councillor Simon Bound No Councillor Tony Capon No Councillor Kerri Carruthers No Councillor Jack Cousens No Councillor Onnalee Cubitt No Councillor Hayley Eachus No Councillor Laura Edwards No Councillor Graham Falconer No Councillor Angie Freeman Yes Councillor Jane Frankum Yes Councillor Paul Frankum Yes Councillor Stuart Frost No Councillor Roger Gardiner No Councillor Paul Gaskell No Councillor Dave George No Councillor Sven Godesen No Councillor Hannah Golding No Councillor Stephanie Grant Yes

Page 15 Councillor Paul Harvey Yes Councillor Ryan Hickling Abstain Councillor Ronald Hussey Abstain Councillor John Izett No Councillor Tony Jones Yes Councillor Gavin James Abstain Councillor Laura James Yes Councillor Clare Kinnear No Councillor Andy Konieczko Abstain Councillor David Leeks No Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Abstain Councillor Simon Mahaffey No Councillor Andrew McCormick Yes Councillor John McKay Abstain Councillor Paul Miller No Councillor Colin Phillimore Yes Councillor David Potter Yes Councillor Dan Putty No Councillor Colin Regan Yes Councillor Ken Rhatigan No Councillor Nicholas Robinson No Councillor Tristan Robinson No Councillor Mark Ruffell No Councillor Clive Sanders No Councillor Elaine Still No Councillor Diane Taylor Abstain Councillor Kim Taylor Yes Councillor Mark Taylor Yes Councillor Ian Tilbury Yes Councillor Chris Tomblin Yes Councillor Jenny Vaux No Councillor Gary Watts Yes Councillor Janet Westbrook Yes Councillor Michael Westbrook No Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge Yes Rejected Substantive Motion Recommendations 1-14 (Resolution) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Abstain Councillor Rebecca Bean Yes Councillor Michael Bound Abstain Councillor Simon Bound Yes Councillor Tony Capon Yes Councillor Kerri Carruthers Yes Councillor Jack Cousens Yes Councillor Onnalee Cubitt Yes Councillor Hayley Eachus Yes Councillor Laura Edwards Yes Councillor Graham Falconer Yes

Page 16 Councillor Angie Freeman No Councillor Jane Frankum No Councillor Paul Frankum No Councillor Stuart Frost Yes Councillor Roger Gardiner Yes Councillor Paul Gaskell Yes Councillor Dave George Yes Councillor Sven Godesen Yes Councillor Hannah Golding Yes Councillor Stephanie Grant No Councillor Paul Harvey No Councillor Ryan Hickling Abstain Councillor Ronald Hussey Abstain Councillor John Izett Yes Councillor Tony Jones No Councillor Gavin James Abstain Councillor Laura James No Councillor Clare Kinnear Yes Councillor Andy Konieczko Abstain Councillor David Leeks Yes Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Abstain Councillor Simon Mahaffey Yes Councillor Andrew McCormick No Councillor John McKay Abstain Councillor Paul Miller Yes Councillor Colin Phillimore No Councillor David Potter No Councillor Dan Putty Yes Councillor Colin Regan Abstain Councillor Ken Rhatigan Yes Councillor Nicholas Robinson Yes Councillor Tristan Robinson Yes Councillor Mark Ruffell Yes Councillor Clive Sanders Yes Councillor Elaine Still Yes Councillor Diane Taylor Yes Councillor Kim Taylor No Councillor Mark Taylor No Councillor Ian Tilbury No Councillor Chris Tomblin Abstain Councillor Jenny Vaux Yes Councillor Gary Watts No Councillor Janet Westbrook Abstain Councillor Michael Westbrook Yes Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge No Carried Substantive Motion Recommendation 15 Council Priorities (Resolution) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Yes

Page 17 Councillor Rebecca Bean Yes Councillor Michael Bound Abstain Councillor Simon Bound Yes Councillor Tony Capon Yes Councillor Kerri Carruthers Yes Councillor Jack Cousens Yes Councillor Onnalee Cubitt Yes Councillor Hayley Eachus Yes Councillor Laura Edwards Yes Councillor Graham Falconer Yes Councillor Angie Freeman No Councillor Jane Frankum No Councillor Paul Frankum No Councillor Stuart Frost Yes Councillor Roger Gardiner Yes Councillor Paul Gaskell Yes Councillor Dave George Yes Councillor Sven Godesen Yes Councillor Hannah Golding Yes Councillor Stephanie Grant Abstain Councillor Paul Harvey No Councillor Ryan Hickling Abstain Councillor Ronald Hussey Abstain Councillor John Izett Yes Councillor Tony Jones No Councillor Gavin James Abstain Councillor Laura James No Councillor Clare Kinnear Yes Councillor Andy Konieczko Abstain Councillor David Leeks Yes Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Abstain Councillor Simon Mahaffey Yes Councillor Andrew McCormick Abstain Councillor John McKay Abstain Councillor Paul Miller Yes Councillor Colin Phillimore No Councillor David Potter No Councillor Dan Putty Yes Councillor Colin Regan Abstain Councillor Ken Rhatigan Yes Councillor Nicholas Robinson Yes Councillor Tristan Robinson Yes Councillor Mark Ruffell Yes Councillor Clive Sanders Yes Councillor Elaine Still Yes Councillor Diane Taylor Yes Councillor Kim Taylor Abstain Councillor Mark Taylor Abstain

Page 18 Councillor Ian Tilbury No Councillor Chris Tomblin No Councillor Jenny Vaux Yes Councillor Gary Watts No Councillor Janet Westbrook Yes Councillor Michael Westbrook Yes Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge No Carried

74/20 Capital Programme Update and Strategy 2020/21 to 2024

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Service Improvement introduced the report which provided an update on the capital programme and Capital Programme Strategy for 2021/21 to 2024/25 for approval.

Comments were made during debate regarding the lack of commitment to the ice rink or Basingstoke Town Community Football Club. The Cabinet Member for Borough Development and Improvement responded stating that £6 million had been invested in football facilities across the borough. Investment had been made to upgrade the football facilities at Winklebury to enable Basingstoke Town Community Football Club to return to the town and the council would continue to work with them in the future.

Councillor Tilbury referred to funding to bring back Cottages to a lettable standard and questioned why the properties had been left empty for two years allowing them to degenerate. The Cabinet Member for Homes and Families agreed to provide Councillor Tilbury with a written answer.

Councillor Golding agreed to provide a written answer to Councillor Cubitt who sought clarity regarding page 322 of the agenda as to whether there was a retrospective impact in relation to assets.

The recommendations were put to a vote with FOR 32, ABSENTATIONS 22 AGAINST 0. The recommendations were carried.

Resolved: That Council:

1) Agree the addition of £20.934M to the capital programme and the removal of scheme savings of £0.406M, which gives rise to a net increase of £20.528M to the overall capital programme as detailed in sections 4 to 5 and Appendix 2 of the report.

2) Approve the revised capital programme, which totals £89.638M (as detailed in paragraphs 2 to 8 and Appendix 1) and the associated use of resources.

3) Approve expenditure being incurred on capital schemes in accordance with the revised capital programme and Financial Procedures.

4) Approve the slippage and rephasing and scheme transfers as set out in section 6 and as detailed in Appendix 3.

Page 19

5) Note that the capital programme remains fully funded up to 2024/25 based on the latest forecast of available resources.

6) Approve the Capital Programme Strategy detailed in Appendix 4.

75/20 Treasury Management Strategy 2021/22

Council considered a report which set out the Treasury Management Policy Statement and proposed Treasury Management Strategy for 2021/22 which set the framework and limits for the delivery of the council’s Treasury Management Strategy.

Comment was made regarding amendment to the draft Audit and Accounts Minutes and in relation to ‘green’ investment and ethical investments in the future e.g. fossil fuel.

Resolved: Council

1) Note that the Treasury Management Policy Statement (set out in Appendix 1 of the report) remains unchanged in terms of the policy approach.

2) Approve the Treasury Management Strategy for 2021/22 (set out in Appendix 2 of the report).

76/20 Capital Investment Strategy 2021/22

Council considered a report which set out the Capital Investment Strategy for 2021/22 and Investment Strategy (Non-Treasury) for 2021/22

Resolved: Council approve:

1) The Capital Investment Strategy for 2021/22 (Appendix 1) which includes:

i. the Prudential Indicators for 2021/22 to 2024/25; ii. the Authorised Limit for External Debt of £50.00M for 2021/22(as set out in the prudential indicators); and iii. the Annual Minimum Revenue Provision Statement for 2021/22.

2) The Investment Strategy (Non-Treasury) for 2021/22 (Appendix 2).

77/20 Dispensation Consideration

Resolved: That a request for a further dispensation for Councillor Cooper from attending meetings of the council on the grounds of ill health until 10 May 2021 be approved.

Page 20 78/20 Notice of Motion - Building Fire Safety

This item was deferred to the next meeting of Council.

79/20 Notice of Motion - Support the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill

This item was deferred to the next meeting of Council.

80/20 Notice of Motion - Eco Housing

This item was deferred to the next meeting of Council.

81/20 Questions from Members of the Council on notice

There were no questions.

82/20 Questions to the Chair of Cabinet and/or a committee

There were no questions.

83/20 Urgent Business

Resolved: To agree that the council meeting scheduled for 25 March 2021 be moved to 18 March 2021.

The meeting ended at 10.15 pm.

Chairman

Page 21 This page is intentionally left blank

Minutes of the Council meeting held on Thursday, 18 March 2021 in Virtual Meeting - Zoom Webinar, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council at 6.30 pm

Members of the Council in attendance: Councillor D Taylor (Chair), Councillor C Ashfield, Councillor R Bean, Councillor M Bound, Councillor S Bound, Councillor K Carruthers, Councillor R Cooper, Councillor J Cousens, Councillor O Cubitt, Councillor H Eachus, Councillor L Edwards, Councillor G Falconer, Councillor A Freeman, Councillor J Frankum, Councillor P Frankum, Councillor S Frost, Councillor R Gardiner, Councillor P Gaskell, Councillor D George, Councillor P Harvey, Councillor R Hickling, Councillor R Hussey, Councillor J Izett, Councillor T Jones, Councillor G James, Councillor L James, Councillor C Kinnear, Councillor A Konieczko, Councillor D Leeks, Councillor W Lovegrove, Councillor S Mahaffey, Councillor A McCormick, Councillor J McKay, Councillor P Miller, Councillor C Phillimore, Councillor D Potter, Councillor D Putty, Councillor C Regan, Councillor T Reid, Councillor K Rhatigan, Councillor N Robinson, Councillor T Robinson, Councillor M Ruffell, Councillor C Sanders, Councillor E Still, Councillor K Taylor, Councillor M Taylor, Councillor I Tilbury, Councillor C Tomblin, Councillor J Vaux, Councillor G Watts, Councillor J Westbrook, Councillor M Westbrook and Councillor C Wooldridge

84/20 Apologies for absence

Apologies were received from Cllrs Capon, Godesen, Golding, Grant and Keating.

85/20 Declarations of interest

Cllrs Eachus and Phillimore declared interests under agenda item 16 (Notice of Motion – Levelling up Sports Facilities in the Borough), Cllr Eachus due to her employment and Cllr Phillimore as a board member of Basingstoke Football Club.

Cllrs Wooldridge and Putty declared interests under agenda item 17 (Notice of Motion – Housing Green Conversion), Cllr Wooldridge as an employee of Sovereign, and Cllr Putty as a trustee for Sovereign.

86/20 Minutes of the meeting held on 25 February 2021

Minutes of the meeting held on 25 February 2021, to be approved at the next meeting of Council on 27 May 2021.

87/20 Announcements

The Mayor wished a warm farewell to all those members not returning to council following the forthcoming local elections.

The Leader of the Council reported that further to questions raised by Alex Lee at the previous meeting he had written to government ministers and was awaiting a

Page 23 response, which would be communicated once received.

88/20 Questions from members of the public

Question 1 Paul Beevers

Most Councillors will be aware of Basingstoke’s place in the Hampshire Downs and the environmental and ecological opportunity it presents, confirmed by Natural . In order to protect and reconnect more of this landscape and restore nature, between the South Downs National Park (SDNP) and the North Wessex Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (NWAONB) will the relevant Portfolio Holder respond to, support and refer to Committee this request to explore further designation of the Hampshire Downs as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty?

Answer: Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment

Can I thank Mr Beevers for his timely question. He and others have been requesting that we look at the status of the North Hampshire Downs and other areas in the borough for some significant time and his question is timely as we have a motion that looks at designation tonight. As Mr Beevers knows designation comes in different shapes and sizes and doesn’t necessarily have to be an AONB. It can be other forms as well, and the motion that the council will be discussing later will be to look at all the valued landscapes around the borough to the north and to the east as well as to the south, and whether they should be given some form of protection.

The aim is for that discussion to take place at EPH and I want EPH to discuss how we can support Neighbourhood Planning for our villages by giving a greater level of protection to the precious landscapes that lie beyond them. This applies equally to Sherfield as it does to Sherborne St John, to just as much as it does to , to Bradley as it does to Bramley.

Can I thank Mr Beevers for his question and it is up to members tonight to decide if they wish that topic to be discussed further, whatever the outcome of the discussion, at EPH.

Supplementary question

Would the Portfolio Holder agree that the scope of the Nature recovery network included within the motion must include all of the Hampshire Downs, all of the borough especially south-west of Basingstoke, and urban as well as rural areas?

Answer

I would like to answer that question by saying it is too difficult to answer. I believe it is in the ambit of the EPH committee to consider once it understands its full implications. But I am keen for the area of nature recovery areas to be defined, not to be nebulous, and for them to be large and not inconsequential.

Page 24 They are probably the only two broad things I would like to say about it, other than saying I would like to see them all around the borough not just in one particular area, to the north, to the east and to the south, and bear in mind the excellent work that has already been done to the north-east by the AONB that is in place there.

Cllr P Frankum requested, and Cllr J Frankum seconded under section 11.9 of the council’s Constitution (Rules of Procedure), that this be referred to the Economic, Planning and Housing Committee for discussion. Council agreed.

Question 2 Francesca Maritan

What is the council’s plan and timescale for a permanent solution to the pieces of land across the Borough, where the original S.52 notices have not been enforced which has resulted, in the case of Broadhurst Grove, land changing hands in rapid succession and putting the ‘village green / pocket park status’ at risk?

Answer: Leader of the Council

Thank you for the question. To give council some reassurance that this is important to the administration, I visited Broadhurst Grove on Sunday to look at the village green to get a feel for what the residents’ value on that is. I spoke to Mrs Moore who I know is a resident there. It is a very important issue to us and one that I know my colleagues Cllrs Cubitt, Godesen and Ruffell have all queried with me.

I spoke to the Chief Executive on Monday and we are setting up a task force to review this other s52 notice cases across the borough. They will be reviewed properly to provide them with some standing and status. Open space is protected under policy EM5 of the green infrastructure strategy adopted by the council and the policy seeks to protect and enhance the extent of both private and public open space. We cherish it, but of course, sometimes things slip through then net, and although the s52 in this case is over 40 years old it is beholden on us as a council to protect those open spaces where we have a responsibility.

I assure the questioner that we will do everything in our power to ensure that there is proper land management and that it is designated properly and not to allow another period of worry and distress to befall other communities across the borough.

Supplementary question

It is good to hear about the task force being established, but what action can be made which will provide the safeguards for the land to be correctly placed into the ownership of the council as planned, and prevent future purchasers using significant amounts of money to purchase something which technically they are unable to own?

Answer

I accept that it is important and we will be trawling through to ensure that every piece of land with an s52 on it will be properly accounted for and therefore we will be able to go back to residents and offer opportunities for the protection of that land without

Page 25 the worry of having to think who is buying it next. We will report back to you through local councillors to tell you what, why and how we have done this to protect you in the long term. I hope that is acceptable.

Question 3 Martin Heath

We, in Basingstoke appear to be impaled on the horns of a dilemma. We have the laudable aim of becoming carbon neutral by 2030; yet at the same time we have ambitious plans to grow our borough by 1,000s of more people, we want to attract new industry, invest in new roads and build thousands of new homes. These two aims are mutually incompatible.

The existing homes, buildings, cars and people of Basingstoke already generate 1.3 million tonnes of greenhouse gases each year. To reduce that to zero by 2030 requires a reduction in emissions of some 144,000 tonnes each and every year for the next 9 years.

Unless every single new home, every single new office block or warehouse and every single km of new road is built to a zero carbon standard a zero carbon borough will not be possible.

If we do not retrofit every existing building to the highest standards of energy efficiency and heat recovery a zero carbon borough will not be possible.

If we do not replace the vast majority of our cars and massively invest in public transport a zero carbon borough will not be possible. If we do replace almost every single gas boiler then a zero carbon borough will not be possible.

If we do not invest in renewable forms of energy generation a zero carbon borough will not be possible.

If we do not address the 100,000s of tonnes of GHG that are caused by our consumption of goods and services, by our international air travel and by the way we manage our land and grow our food a zero carbon borough will not be possible.

Given the above, how will we in Basingstoke retrofit our homes, mandate the building of zero carbon homes, offices, and warehouses, revolutionise our transport systems, transform the way we create and handle waste and grow our food if the strategy is completely silent on each of this vital issues?

Answer: Cabinet Member for Environment and Enforcement

Thank you for the question. We recently met this week with officers and I take all of these issues very seriously. Firstly, I’d like to agree with you on a number of points raised in your statement. We have ourselves very ambitious targets in the borough, particularly around reaching net zero carbon as a council by 2025, and a net zero carbon borough by 2030. The topics you raise set out the scale of challenges in front of us and the key areas that we have to address. I do question your point about the strategy being silent on most of these points and

Page 26 in fact I consider that they are captured within the areas of focus set out within the strategy such as buildings or transport. You have to remember the strategy sets out a framework for action moving forward. It is not going to capture absolutely everything. There will be further details set out in accompanying action plans and we have to acknowledge that it is a living document and so will be updated annually as well as reporting on the progress against the actions included. Some actions set out already address your points raised, such as an update to the Local Plan which will set the policy for new development within the borough, whereas we acknowledge other actions require further development. In tackling these big issues we should acknowledge that there is an increasing national policy and support for this work and as a council we have a vital role in connecting national policy and support with local action maximising available opportunities, whilst seeking to understand how to bridge the gaps where these exist.

The ambitions set out within this strategy will not be delivered without support and collaboration across the borough and beyond and so we look forward to continuing to work with yourselves and others in implementing this strategy.

Question 4 Shelia Peacock

What will the Council do to encourage “build back better”, i.e. to encourage new start-ups in industry and commerce in the borough that contribute to carbon reduction locally and nationally?

Answer: Leader of the Council

Thank you Sheila as always a good question, and one that is to the point.

Firstly, I attend meetings that mean that we are deeply involved in the economic recovery piece. I was with EM3 this morning and Bass this afternoon to outline our hopes for a greener recovery. The fact that we are committing £2 million both to the climate change emergency funding and with that, money that will go to the economic recovery (£1million to each), means that we are financially committed. But as you rightly say, we need to do more that, so what we are trying to achieve is a healthier, better, greener economy in everything that we do. I think that there has been a fundamental change post-Covid, with less reliance on the car, the ability to work from home and to not have to travel. Part of what we discussed today was that shortening of supply chains. Why should some PPE have to come all the way from China, wouldn’t it be better if we had a manufacturing base here in the UK, and then didn’t have the transport issues that brining goods halfway around the world entails. There is a lot that we can do. Of course it is a tightrope. We have got to walk carefully to make sure that economic recovery doesn’t come at any cost and particularly not at the cost of our environment, climate or health and wellbeing. We will rise to those green challenges and make sure through a series of reviews in this council and more widely to answer that what we are doing with our money and how are we making sure that the economy that comes back is greener than the one that we left pre-Covid.

Page 27

89/20 Petitions

Stand Up for the North Hampshire Downs withdrew its petition from the agenda.

90/20 Resignations and appointments

a) There were no changes to Committees. b) No appointments were made to Outside Bodies.

91/20 Notice of Motion deferred from the meeting held on 25 February 2021 - Building Fire Safety

Councillor Frost moved and Councillor Miller seconded the following motion, which had been amended since initially being tabled in the agenda of 25 February 2021.

Council notes:

 The recent concerns raised at Crown Heights, following an EWS1 survey showing that the building was not at an acceptable standard of fire safety.

 That residents are understandably concerned by the safety implications this has on their homes.

 The high costs being incurred by residents for a 'Waking Watch' 24/7 fire service while the issues are resolved.

Council Resolves

 To work with the Fire Service to identify all tall buildings in the Borough, and to apply pressure on the owners of all tall buildings to undertake the relevant fire safety surveys.

 To effectively communicate with freeholders of tall buildings, and make clear the Council's expectation that they publish a clear timetable for residents, detailing any remedial action necessary and associated issues.

 To make clear to freeholders, that it is the Council's view that the current situation is unacceptable and that the costs associated with remedial action for fire safety should not be met by residents.

 With the fall of the Smith McPartland amendment in The House, for the Cabinet Member to write to our local Members of Parliament, asking for their support in this matter, lobbying the Government for the costs of remediation

Page 28 works to be met by the building owner and not passed onto residents.

 For the Cabinet Member to write to HM Government and ask for clarity on the availability of building safety funding schemes for Crown Heights, and any other affected buildings in Basingstoke and Deane.

 That this motion is sent to the EPH committee to receive progress reports and task force updates.

The motion was unanimously agreed.

Resolved: Council agrees

 To work with the Fire Service to identify all tall buildings in the Borough, and to apply pressure on the owners of all tall buildings to undertake the relevant fire safety surveys;  To effectively communicate with freeholders of tall buildings, and make clear the Council's expectation that they publish a clear timetable for residents, detailing any remedial action necessary and associated issues;  To make clear to freeholders, that it is the Council's view that the current situation is unacceptable and that the costs associated with remedial action for fire safety should not be met by residents;  With the fall of the Smith McPartland amendment in The House, for the Cabinet Member to write to our local Members of Parliament, asking for their support in this matter, lobbying the Government for the costs of remediation works to be met by the building owner and not passed onto residents;  For the Cabinet Member to write to HM Government and ask for clarity on the availability of building safety funding schemes for Crown Heights, and any other affected buildings in Basingstoke and Deane; and  That this motion is sent to the EPH committee to receive progress reports and task force updates.

92/20 Notice of Motion deferred from the meeting held on 25 February 2021- Support the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill

Council considered the following motion moved by Cllr Konieczko and seconded by Cllr Hickling:-

Council resolves to:

 Support the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill  Inform the local media of this decision;  Write to local MPs, asking them to support the Bill; and  Write to the CEE Bill Alliance, the organisers of the campaign for the Bill, expressing its support.  Lobby the government not to permit the relaxation of policies that run contrary to the aims and spirit of the Bill and risk further damaging our environment -

Page 29 such as the withdrawal of the ban on neonicotinoid insecticides, which pose a grave threat to bees.

The motion was fully debated and a number of members spoke in support of the motion.

However, the Portfolio Member for Environment and Enforcement did not support the motion and suggested that it was unrealistic and would, if passed, restrict the work of the council.

Upon request from Cllr G James, a recorded vote was taken and the motion was carried with 32 votes in favour, 20 against and 1 abstention. (It should be noted that Cllr Cousens was not yet present at the meeting.)

Resolved: the motion be carried.

Support the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill (Motion) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Yes Councillor Rebecca Bean No Councillor Michael Bound Yes Councillor Simon Bound No Councillor Kerri Carruthers Abstain Councillor Ruth Cooper Yes Councillor Jack Cousens No vote recorded Councillor Onnalee Cubitt Yes Councillor Hayley Eachus No Councillor Laura Edwards No Councillor Graham Falconer No Councillor Angie Freeman Yes Councillor Jane Frankum Yes Councillor Paul Frankum Yes Councillor Stuart Frost No Councillor Roger Gardiner No Councillor Paul Gaskell No Councillor Dave George Yes Councillor Paul Harvey Yes Councillor Ryan Hickling Yes Councillor Ronald Hussey Yes Councillor John Izett No Councillor Tony Jones Yes Councillor Gavin James Yes Councillor Laura James Yes Councillor Clare Kinnear Yes Councillor Andy Konieczko Yes Councillor David Leeks No Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Yes Councillor Simon Mahaffey No Councillor Andrew McCormick Yes

Page 30 Councillor John McKay Yes Councillor Paul Miller No Councillor Colin Phillimore Yes Councillor David Potter Yes Councillor Dan Putty No Councillor Colin Regan Yes Councillor Terri Reid Yes Councillor Ken Rhatigan No Councillor Nicholas Robinson Yes Councillor Tristan Robinson No Councillor Mark Ruffell No Councillor Clive Sanders No Councillor Elaine Still No Councillor Diane Taylor Yes Councillor Kim Taylor Yes Councillor Mark Taylor Yes Councillor Ian Tilbury Yes Councillor Chris Tomblin Yes Councillor Jenny Vaux No Councillor Gary Watts Yes Councillor Janet Westbrook Yes Councillor Michael Westbrook Yes Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge Yes Carried

93/20 Notice of Motion deferred from the meeting held on 25 February 2021 - Eco Housing

Council considered the following motion proposed by Cllr McKay and seconded by Cllr Tomblin:-

Council notes: The declaration of a Climate Emergency in 2019 committed it to taking action to make the Borough carbon neutral by 2030. That over 25% of Borough carbon emission relate to the heating and powering of homes (BDBC Climate Change & Air quality Strategy draft). That the significant house building planned in the borough presents an additional challenge but also an opportunity to put climate emergency response at the forefront of new development. The Manydown development alone includes plans for 3,400 new homes. The Parc Eirin development in Wales is an actively managed development of 225 affordable eco-houses that are close to zero carbon. Each house has solar panels built in, hot water thermal storage, battery storage of electrical power, deep borehole ground source heating and 3 phase electrical power supplies for superfast electrical vehicle charging. These houses do not burn anything; they are houses for the 21st century.

Page 31 Council requests Cabinet to commit: To undertake a detailed study of the Parc Eirin development and other exemplar schemes and to report with recommendations as to how a similar or larger scale eco-house project could be realised within the developments now planned in the Borough. https://fullycharged.show/episodes/affordable-eco-housing-is-this-what-we-should- be-building/ Members expressed widespread support for the motion, but it was noted that some of the standards would be easier to achieve with new builds than existing housing stock.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment spoke in support of the motion and drew members’ attention to the work of the Climate Change MAP which was working to introduce new standards within the local plan update.

There were requests to apply the standards of the Parc Eirin development to the forthcoming Manydown and Leisure park developments.

The motion was unanimously agreed.

Resolved: the motion be carried.

94/20 Adoption of the Climate Change and Air Quality Strategy

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Enforcement introduced the report which set out a new strategy and principles for action to enable the council to meet its targets agreed in the 2019 Declaration of Climate Emergency and to ultimately achieve carbon neutrality for the borough by 2030.

The Portfolio Holder commented that there had been significant work undertaken to date but that the report signified the start of work going forward, and was very much a living document.

It was recognised that the targets were ambitious which would require behaviour changes by all. However, it was noted that response to the report consultation indicated that local residents were supportive and that the issue was of particular importance to them.

The Portfolio Holder proposed that the report be amended with the following addition:-

‘Portfolio Holder for Environment and Enforcement is to attend CEP committee once a year to provide a verbal update to the committee in relation to progress made against the action plan, to include confirmation that the MAP is still meeting and what has been discussed, agreed actions being undertaken by the officer delivery

Page 32 group and any other relevant information about ongoing projects and work in progress.’

Cllr Mahaffey seconded the amendment which was unanimously agreed.

Resolved: that Council

 Adopt the Climate Change and Air Quality Strategy and the 2020/21 Action Plan.

95/20 Pay Policy Statement 2021/22

The Mayor proposed and Deputy Mayor seconded the recommendation from the Human Resources Committee to approve the Pay Policy Statement 2021/22. Resolved: that Council approve the Pay Policy Statement 2021/22.

96/20 Quarter 3 Revenue Monitoring Report and Covid-19 Financial Impact Update 2020/21

The Leader of the Council proposed, and Cllr Izett seconded recommendations from the Cabinet meeting held on 9 March 2021. The Leader of the Council highlighted that outturn had been more than anticipated earlier in the financial year which had allowed for allocation of an extra £1 million directly to the Climate Change Reserve. Further it was noted that £1 million had also been allocated to the economic recovery framework to assist local business with growth and recovery.

Resolved: that Council

 Approve a contribution to the Manydown Housing Reserve of £0.42M to be released in 2021/22 and future years to provide provision for further activities that maybe required in bringing the land into use at Manydown South, any activities in relation to J7 and to support activities in relation to a new Hospital provision;  The transfer of £0.54M back into the MTFS Risk Reserve in 2020/21 to be utilised in 2021/22 in relation to the slippage on the Manydown Capacity funding activity as detailed in paragraphs 5.56 to 5.58;  A contribution to the Climate Change Reserve of £1.00M to be released in 2021/22 and future years to provide further provision of funding to support the Climate Change agenda; and  The creation of an Economic Recovery Fund Reserve of £1.00M to be released in 2021/22 and future years to support the Economic Recovery Framework action plan. Approval is also sought to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Borough Development, in consultation with the Executive Director of Corporate Services (S151 Officer) and the Leader of the Council (the portfolio holder) to agree the Economic Recovery Fund spending plan.

Page 33

97/20 Members Allowances 2021/22

The recommendation was moved by the Mayor and seconded by the Deputy Mayor.

A number of members expressed concern at any increase to allowances given the general widespread hardship suffered by residents as a result of the Covid pandemic.

The Head of Law and Governance clarified that the index mirrored the award agreed for officers and that government had already indicated that there would be a pay freeze.

At the request of Cllr Phillimore, a recorded vote was taken and the recommendation was approved with 49 votes in favour, 2 against and 3 abstentions.

Resolved: that Council

 Adopt the scheme of allowances as set out Appendix 1 for the municipal year 2021/22, effective from 1 April 2021  Apply the index, which is the pay award agreed for officers on the National Joint Council for Local Government Services terms and conditions, to 1 above from 1 April 2021; and  Delegates authority to the Head of Law and Governance in consultation with the Executive Director of Corporate Services to: (i) take all necessary action to implement 1 and 2 above, (ii) undertake the necessary publicity requirements in relation to the scheme adopted, (iii) update the constitution; and (iv) to establish an Independent Remuneration Panel to review the scheme of allowances for implementation of the revised scheme from April 2022.

Members allowances 2021/22 (Resolution) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Yes Councillor Rebecca Bean Yes Councillor Michael Bound Yes Councillor Simon Bound Yes Councillor Kerri Carruthers Yes Councillor Ruth Cooper Yes Councillor Jack Cousens Yes Councillor Onnalee Cubitt Yes Councillor Hayley Eachus Yes Councillor Laura Edwards Yes Councillor Graham Falconer Yes Councillor Angie Freeman Yes Councillor Jane Frankum Yes

Page 34 Councillor Paul Frankum Yes Councillor Stuart Frost Yes Councillor Roger Gardiner Yes Councillor Paul Gaskell Yes Councillor Dave George Yes Councillor Paul Harvey Yes Councillor Ryan Hickling Yes Councillor Ronald Hussey Yes Councillor John Izett Yes Councillor Tony Jones Yes Councillor Gavin James Yes Councillor Laura James Yes Councillor Clare Kinnear Yes Councillor Andy Konieczko Yes Councillor David Leeks Yes Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Yes Councillor Simon Mahaffey Yes Councillor Andrew McCormick Yes Councillor John McKay Yes Councillor Paul Miller Yes Councillor Colin Phillimore No Councillor David Potter Yes Councillor Dan Putty Yes Councillor Colin Regan Yes Councillor Terri Reid Abstain Councillor Ken Rhatigan Yes Councillor Nicholas Robinson Yes Councillor Tristan Robinson Yes Councillor Mark Ruffell Yes Councillor Clive Sanders Abstain Councillor Elaine Still Yes Councillor Diane Taylor Yes Councillor Kim Taylor Yes Councillor Mark Taylor Abstain Councillor Ian Tilbury No Councillor Chris Tomblin Yes Councillor Jenny Vaux Yes Councillor Gary Watts Yes Councillor Janet Westbrook Yes Councillor Michael Westbrook Yes Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge Yes Carried

98/20 Notice of Motion - Protection and enhancement of the North Hampshire Downs

The following motion was proposed by Cllr Ruffell and seconded by Cllr McCormick:-

The North Hampshire Downs need to have a protected designation to conserve and enhance its natural beauty for the benefit of the natural environment, its residents

Page 35 and the surrounding communities. The North Hampshire Downs stretches from Dummer in the West to Ewshot in the east. It is rich in ancient woodland and provides undisturbed habitats for wildlife and fauna and has 4 SSSI’s. It is the source of tributaries that feed the rivers Itchen, Hart, Loddon, Lyde, Wey and Whitewater. Its landscape value has being recognised in part by the designation of Grade 1 parkland at Hackwood and the protection of trees at Queen’s View in Ewshot. It remains remote in terms of having dark skies, lack of connection to mains gas and drainage, and landscapes where no buildings or roads can be seen. The landscape is enjoyed by walkers, cyclists and horse riders from those who live in and near to the North Hampshire Downs. It is regarded as a green lung for the residents of Basingstoke. The North Wessex Downs AONB has reached out to the North Hampshire Downs with a view to exploring designation so that the chalk landscapes can become connected to those of the South Downs National Park. The beautiful landscape of the North Hampshire Downs and the natural environment that it sustains is under threat from expanding populations around its edges. The natural environment within the North Hampshire Downs is in urgent need of protection and restoration. Therefore, this Council requests:

1. That the Council urgently asks Officers and the EPH Committee to examine working with residents, neighbouring designated areas, neighbouring district and county councils and Natural England and other interested bodies to seek designation for the North Hampshire Downs as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and to examine whether other areas of the Borough should also seek designation in order to protect our historic villages and landscapes.

2. That the Council asks Officers and the EPH Committee to examine working with residents, neighbouring designated areas, neighbouring district and county councils, Natural England and other interested bodies to establish a nature recovery network for the North Hampshire Downs area and to examine whether other areas of the Borough should also establish nature recovery areas in order to protect our historic villages and landscapes.

Members debated the motion.

Whilst there was widespread support for the general tone of the motion, a number of members requested that reference to only the North Hampshire Downs be removed.

There was concern that the motion appeared to be favouring and acting to save one area to the detriment of the whole borough. Members urged for a more comprehensive coverage and those in rural wards particularly disputed the sole focus on the North Hampshire Downs.

It was suggested that the motion be amended to remove reference to the North Hampshire Downs and instead refer to protecting the borough’s historic villages and landscapes.

The proposer and seconder agreed to amend the motion, however this proved too complicated given the time constraints of the meeting.

Under section 8.12(e) of the council’s Constitution (Rules of Procedure), Cllr T

Page 36 Robinson proposed and Cllr J Frankum seconded a suggestion to adjourn the motion.

Members voted to adjourn the debate, with the decision carried by 42 votes in support and 11 abstentions.

Resolved: debate on the motion be adjourned.

99/20 Notice of Motion - Levelling up Sports Facilities in the Borough

Councillor Cousens proposed and Councillor T Robinson seconded the below motion:-

Council notes;

1. The desire for improved sports facilities across the Borough including the ice rink and Basingstoke Town FC

2. In the National Budget announced on 3 March 2021, the Chancellor unveiled the Levelling Up Fund, which encourages local authorities to apply for up to £20m for important community projects, including sport facilities.

Council requests;

3. The Cabinet and officers work with a range of grassroots sports clubs and facility providers across the Borough to submit an application to the Levelling Up Fund to help improve sports facilities and accessibility within Basingstoke & Deane.

The Portfolio Holder for Borough Development and Improvement spoke in favour of the motion.

However a number of members expressed doubt that the funds could be applied to grassroots sports clubs, and that supporting the motion would give sports clubs within the borough false hope. There was concern that expectation raised could not then be delivered due to ultimate government constraints.

As seconder, the Portfolio Holder for Homes and Families urged councillors to support the motion on the basis that nothing would be achieved if the council did not at least try to secure the funding for sports within the borough.

Upon the request of Cllr Cousens, a recorded vote was taken and the motion was carried with 43 votes in favour, 8 abstentions and 2 no votes.

Resolved: the motion be carried.

Levelling up Sports Facilities in the Borough (Motion) Councillor Chloe Ashfield Yes Councillor Rebecca Bean Yes

Page 37 Councillor Michael Bound Yes Councillor Simon Bound Yes Councillor Kerri Carruthers Yes Councillor Ruth Cooper Abstain Councillor Jack Cousens Yes Councillor Onnalee Cubitt Yes Councillor Hayley Eachus No vote recorded Councillor Laura Edwards Yes Councillor Graham Falconer Yes Councillor Angie Freeman Abstain Councillor Jane Frankum Abstain Councillor Paul Frankum Abstain Councillor Stuart Frost Yes Councillor Roger Gardiner Yes Councillor Paul Gaskell Yes Councillor Dave George Yes Councillor Paul Harvey Yes Councillor Ryan Hickling Yes Councillor Ronald Hussey Yes Councillor John Izett Yes Councillor Tony Jones Abstain Councillor Gavin James Yes Councillor Laura James Yes Councillor Clare Kinnear Yes Councillor Andy Konieczko Yes Councillor David Leeks Yes Councillor Warwick Lovegrove Yes Councillor Simon Mahaffey Yes Councillor Andrew McCormick Yes Councillor John McKay Yes Councillor Paul Miller Yes Councillor Colin Phillimore No vote recorded Councillor David Potter Yes Councillor Dan Putty Yes Councillor Colin Regan Abstain Councillor Terri Reid Yes Councillor Ken Rhatigan Yes Councillor Nicholas Robinson Yes Councillor Tristan Robinson Yes Councillor Mark Ruffell Yes Councillor Clive Sanders Yes Councillor Elaine Still Yes Councillor Diane Taylor Yes Councillor Kim Taylor Yes Councillor Mark Taylor Abstain Councillor Ian Tilbury Yes Councillor Chris Tomblin Yes Councillor Jenny Vaux Yes

Page 38 Councillor Gary Watts Abstain Councillor Janet Westbrook Yes Councillor Michael Westbrook Yes Councillor Carolyn Wooldridge Yes Carried

100/20 Notice of Motion - Housing Green Conversion

Councillor McCormick proposed and Cllr McKay seconded the following motion:-

Council notes:

1. That if we are to succeed in making the Borough climate neutral by 2030, we need to make sure all the existing homes in the Borough become zero net carbon, as well as any new builds. 2. That massive changes are required to several tens of thousands of homes, with a multitude of owners from private individuals to housing associations. 3. That if we are to see the successful implementation of such changes in just eight years, an early start is required, and that we will need to be proactive in engaging with residents, housing associations, companies, other councils, and central government in achieving this. A number of Members spoke in favour of the proposal and the motion was carried unanimously.

Resolved: the motion be carried and Council agrees

 To work with Vivid and Sovereign Housing Associations to identify pilot estates for conversion of housing to low-carbon energy sources, with reduced energy and water consumption, improved insulation, use of solar panels and home batteries, and other measures to reduce carbon emissions and improve energy performance;  To work with other councils and partner agencies in promoting initiatives such as Solar Together Hampshire to help facilitate home conversions, and use the lessons from the pilot estates to help speed up the wider roll-out;  That this issue is referred to the EPH committee for oversight, and the relevant portfolio-holder is tasked with drawing up an action plan; and  That regular reports go to the Climate Emergency MAP who are ideally placed for more detailed discussions on this issue.

101/20 Questions from Members of the Council on notice

There were no questions.

102/20 To receive the minutes of the following meetings

Referring to the Cabinet meeting on 9 February 2021, Councillor McCormick

Page 39 requested an update in relation to a written response promised further to queries raised under item 5. The Cabinet Member for Homes and Families agreed to send the information immediately following conclusion of the meeting.

The meeting ended at 10.15 pm.

Chairman

Page 40 Agenda Item 7

Allocation of Seats to Political Groups Head of Law & Governance and Monitoring Officer

Report to Council Meeting date: 27 May 2021 Ward(s): All Key Decision: No Appendix 1: Scheme of Proportionality and allocation of seats Papers relied on: N/A

Recommendation to Council:

. The committee sizes and scheme of proportionality for 2021/22 be approved, as set out in Appendix 1, in order to enable appointments to be made to Committees of Council.

. To note that in the recommended scheme of proportionality for 2021/22, the number of seats in all committees, other than Development Control and Audit and Accounts committees have been reduced by one seat.

. To agree to depart from political proportionality in the allocation of seats to Standards Committee

Background, corporate objectives and priorities

This report accords with the council’s Policy and Budget Framework and supports the development of an effective and efficient council.

Page1 of 541

Main considerations

1 Executive Summary

1.1 Council, at its Annual Meeting each year, is required to confirm the allocation of seats to the different political groups so as to give effect to and reflect, so far as is reasonably practicable, the political balance of the Members of the Council.

1.2 The Local Government and Housing Act 1989 established the principle of the proportional allocation of committee and sub-committee seats. Section 15 of the Act requires the following principles to be followed:

a) that not all the seats on the body are allocated to the same political group;

b) that the majority of the seats on the body is allocated to a particular political group if the number of persons belonging to that group is a majority of the authority’s membership;

c) subject to paragraphs (a) and (b) above, that the number of seats on the ordinary committees of a relevant authority which are allocated to each political group bears the same proportion to the total of all the seats on the ordinary committees of that authority as is borne by the number of members of that group to the membership of the authority; and

d) subject to paragraphs (a) to (c) above, that the number of the seats on the body which are allocated to each political group bears the same proportion to the number of all the seats on that body as is borne by the number of members of that group to the membership of the authority.

1.3 The political composition of the Council following the 2021 elections is:

 Conservative - 33  Labour – 10  Independent Forum – 6  Liberal Democrats – 5

1.4 This report seeks approval to the committee sizes together with the scheme of proportionality for 2021/22 as set out in Appendix 1.

1.5 This report also seeks approval for the Standards Committee to depart from political proportionality as set out in 3.2.4.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The Local Government and Housing Act 1989 requires local authorities to review committee membership and political representation annually. By law, seats on committees must be allocated in proportion to the political composition of the Council. In addition, the total number of seats across all of the committees must reflect the overall political balance of the Council. An authority can only decide that it wishes to adopt an arrangement other than a Page 42

2 of 5

politically proportionate one if no Member votes against the resolution at a meeting of the Council.

3.0 Key Issues for consideration

3.1 Committees of Council

3.1.1 The Council’s Constitution currently provides for the appointment of the following committees:

 Audit and Accounts Committee  Community, Environment and Partnerships Committee  Development Control Committee  Economic, Planning and Housing Committee  Human Resources Committee  Licensing Committee  Manydown Overview Committee  Scrutiny Committee  Standards Committee  Investigation and Disciplinary Committee

3.1.2 Under the Committee Procedure Rules, which form part of the Constitution, Committees of the Council shall not normally exceed 12 members, unless otherwise stated.

3.2 Political Proportionality 2021/22

3.2.1 The scheme was last reviewed and agreed by group leaders in December 2020.

3.2.2 In determining the allocation of seats on ordinary committees, the proportion that each political group forms of the total membership of the Council is applied to the total number of elected Member seats on each committee. Fractional entitlements are rounded appropriately to ensure that this process of rounding does not result in advantage to one political group. The aggregate membership of all the ordinary committees must also be in line with the proportions on the Council. The allocations are made to comply with the legislation so far as is reasonably practicable.

3.2.3 As a result of the reduction in the number of councillors from 60 to 54 in the May 2021 election and in order to reflect, so far as is reasonably practicable, the political balance, the committee sizes, other than Development Control and Audit and Accounts Committees have been reduced by one seat .

3.2.4 In previous years, the council has agreed to provide a seat on the Standards Committee to all political groups on the council because of the important nature of its business. It is therefore proposed that this continue. If it is agreed that the composition of this committee continues to depart from political proportionality in appointing members, it can only be agreed if no Member votes against the resolution.

Page 43

3 of 5

4. Options Analysis

4.1 The Council may only choose to depart from political proportionality in appointing members to any of its committees if no Member votes against the resolution at the meeting.

Corporate Implications

5. Legal

5.1 The annual review of the Council’s scheme of political proportionality is a statutory requirement under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.

6. Financial

6.1 None

7. Risk Management

7.1 A risk assessment has been completed in accordance with the council’s risk management process and has identified no significant (Red or Amber) residual risks that cannot be fully minimised by existing or planned controls or additional procedures.

8. Equalities

8.1 None

9. Consultation and communication

9.1 Group Leaders have had sight of the proposed scheme of proportionality.

10. Climate Change

10.1 None

11. HR

11.1 None

12. Conclusion

12.1 Summary and reason for the decision

11.1.1 Approval of the scheme of political proportionality will enable the Council to appoint members to Committees for the municipal year in accordance with the wishes of political groups.

12.2 The options considered and rejected

12.2.1 To not adopt a scheme of proportionality for 2021/22.

Page 44

4 of 5

Date: 19 May 2021 Decision taken by: Council

Lead officer Fiona Thomsen, Head of Law & Governance and Monitoring Officer Report author Fiona Thomsen Version Final Dated 19 May 2021 Status Open It is considered that information contained within this report (and appendix) Confidentiality does not contain exempt information under the meaning of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, and therefore can be made public.

Page 45

5 of 5 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 1 Committee Sizes – Political Proportionality 2021/22

1. Proposed size of committees and calculation of seats

Proportionate no. Cons Labour Independent Liberal Committee Totals of seats Forum Democrats Size Based on 60 elected members No. of councillors 33 10 6 5 Economic, 6.72 2.04 1.22 1.02 11 11 Planning, Housing Community, 6.72 2.04 1.22 1.02 11 11 Environment, Partnerships Manydown 5.50 1.67 1.00 0.83 9 9 Overview Scrutiny 6.72 2.04 1.22 1.02 11 11 Development 7.33 2.22 1.33 1.11 12 12 Control Licensing 6.72 2.04 1.22 1.02 11 11 Human Resources 4.28 1.30 0.78 0.65 7 7 Audit and Accounts 6.11 1.85 1.11 0.93 10 10 IDC 3.06 0.93 0.56 0.46 5 7

Totals 53.17 16.11 9.67 8.06 87 87

2. Proportion of Councillors in each group and proposed number of seats

No. of seats Agreed places Group Council % Proportionate Agreed % Conservatives 61.11% 53.17 53 60.92% Labour 18.52% 16.11 16 18.39% Independent Forum 11.11% 9.67 10 11.49% Liberal Democrats 9.26% 8.06 8 9.20%

These total must agree 87 87

Page1 of 247

3. Proposed allocation of seats

Cons Labour Independent Liberal Committee Totals Forum Democrats Size Agreed no. of seats

33 10 6 5 Economic, Planning, 7 2 1 1 11 11 Housing Community, 7 2 1 1 11 11 Environment, Partnerships Manydown Overview 5 2 1 1 9 9 Scrutiny 7 2 1 1 11 11 Development Control 7 2 2 1 12 12 Licensing 7 2 1 1 11 11 Human Resources 4 1 1 1 7 7 Audit and Accounts 6 2 1 1 10 10 IDC 3 1 1 0 5 5

Totals 53 16 10 8 87 87

Page 48

2 of 2 Agenda Item 11

Outside Body – Appointments at Selection Council

Outside Body Current No to be Term of Nominations Representative(s) appointed Office Aldworths Educational Vacant 2 Until 2023 Trust then 5 Year Term Anvil Arts Vacant 1 Until 2022 then 3 Year Term AWE Local Liaison Vacant 2 No Time Limit Committee Vacant

Barlows Park Cllr K Carruthers 1 1 Year Management Association - Basingstoke Air Cllr P Miller 1 1 Year Cadets (443 (Basingstoke) Air Training Corps) Basingstoke and Vacant 1 1 Year Deane Community Leisure Trust Basingstoke and Cllr P Gaskell 1 1 Year District Sports Trust Limited Basingstoke Canal Cllr M Ruffell 1 4 Years Joint Management Committee Basingstoke Citizens' Cllr J McKay 3 1 Year Advice Cllr D Leeks Vacant Basingstoke Music Vacant 3 1 Year Festival Committee Cllr A Freeman Cllr A McCormick Basingstoke Rape & Vacant 1 1 Year Sexual Abuse Crisis Centre Basingstoke Voluntary Vacant 1 1 Year Action Basingstoke ITEC Cllr S Bound 2 1 Year Vacant Clere School Cllr G Falconer 1 1 Year Community Management Committee

Page 49 District Council's Cllr K Rhatigan 1 1 Year Network Everest Community Vacant 2 1 Year Academy Cllr P Miller Management Group Four Lanes Cllr P Miller 1 1 Year Community Centre Joint Management Committee Hampshire and Isle of Cllr K Rhatigan 2 1 Year Wight Local Cllr S Bound (Leader Government and Association Deputy Leader) Hampshire Building Cllr P Miller 1 1 Year Preservation Trust Limited Herbert Plantation Cllr J Izett 1 1 Year Local Nature Reserve Management Committee Integra North Energy Vacant 1 1 Year from Waste Plant Liaison Panel Kala The Arts Vacant 1 1 Year Local Government Cllr K Rhatigan 1 1 Year Association - National (General Assembly) (Leader) Loddon Social Cllr O Cubitt 1 1 Year Enterprise Ltd North Wessex Downs Cllr P Miller 1 1 Year Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty North Hampshire Area Vacant 2 1 Year Road Safety Council Cllr A McCormick Pamber Forest Local Cllr K Carruthers 2 1 Year Nature Reserve Vacant Advisory Committee Proteus Theatre Vacant 1 3 Years Company Limited Relate North Cllr S Bound 2 1 Year Hampshire Ltd Mr C Connor VIVID previously Cllr S Frost 2 1 Year Sentinel Housing Cllr J Vaux Association Limited (Deputy) Roman Cllr S Mahaffey 1 1 Year Town Advisory Panel Cllr K Rhatigan 1 1 Year Councils

Page 50 Tadley and District Vacant 1 1 Year Citizens' Advice Bureau Trustee Board Tadley and District Cllr J Vaux 1 1 Year Community Association Executive Committee Testbourne Vacant 1 1 Year Community Centre Management Committee Tourism South East Cllr D Leeks 1 1 Year Trustees of Vacant 2 Until 2023 Basingstoke Charities Mr Evans then 4 Year Mr Connor Term Vacant Trustees of The Mayor 3 1 Year Basingstoke Common Cllr O Cubitt Cllr S Godesen Whitchurch Vacant 1 Until 2022 Millennium Green then 3 Year Trust Term Whitchurch Silk Mill Vacant 1 2 Years Trust Young People's Cllr H Golding 1 1 Year Information

Page 51 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 12

Adoption of the Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Plan Head of Planning, Sustainability and Infrastructure

Report to: Council Meeting date: Ward(s): Evingar Key Decision: No Appendix 1: Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2011-2029

Localism Act 2011 The Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended) Papers relied on: Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 The Local Government and Police and Crime Commissioner (Coronavirus) (Postponement of Elections and Referendums) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020

Recommendation to Council:

. That Council, under section 38A(4) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, formally make the Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Plan with immediate effect.

. That Council congratulates the local community and Neighbourhood Planning Group on their work to develop the Plan.

Background, corporate objectives and priorities This report accords with the council’s Budget and Policy Framework and directly supports the Council Plan (2020-24) priorities of:  Strengthening communities  Protecting and enhancing our environment  Planning for the future

Glossary of terms

Term Definition BDBC Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council EqIA Equalities Impact Assessment

Page1 of 753

LPA Local Planning Authority BUR NP Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan 2011-2029

Main considerations

1 Executive Summary

1.1 The report recommends that the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan 2011-2029 (BUR NP) is ‘made’ by the council, following a local referendum held on 6 May 2021, where the plan was supported by 81% of those who voted. The Plan will be used, alongside the Adopted Local Plan and national planning policy and guidance, to determine planning applications in the parish.

1.2 The ‘making’ of the plan is the culmination of a number of years work by the local community and particularly by the members of the steering group for the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan, which consisted of a number of volunteers. The council commends them on their hard work and considers that they should be proud of the final document.

2 The Proposal and key issues for consideration

Background to the Neighbourhood Plan Process

2.1 The production of a neighbourhood plan must follow a statutory process and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Localism Act 2011, the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended), and the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017, set out key stages in the preparation of such plans and the process for them becoming part of the development plan. The key stages are summarised below.

2.2 The Burghclere NP is the eleventh neighbourhood plan in the borough to reach the final stage in the process (stage g), which is highlighted in bold:

a) Designation of a neighbourhood area - The area covered by the neighbourhood plan needs to be agreed by Council. b) Preparation of a draft neighbourhood plan - The ‘qualifying body’1, then prepares the draft neighbourhood plan and evidence base. c) Pre-submission publicity and consultation - The Plan is submitted for Pre-submission publicity and consultation for a minimum of 6 weeks. d) Submission of the draft plan - The ‘qualifying body’ formally submits the neighbourhood plan to the local planning authority (LPA). The LPA checks whether the plan accords with the relevant legislation, publicises the Plan for 6 weeks and appoints an Independent Examiner. e) Independent Examination - The neighbourhood plan is examined by an Independent Examiner to assess whether the Plan meets the basic conditions. The Examiner then issues a report, if the report is positive and the borough Council agrees with it, the Plan is then subject to referendum. The LPA has a duty to have regard to a post-examination neighbourhood plan when determining planning applications.

1 Normally the parish/town council or neighbourhood forum. Page 54

2 of 7 f) Referendum - The borough council organises a referendum, and then publishes the results. If the referendum result is positive, then the neighbourhood plan becomes part of the development plan at that point. g) Adoption – The Plan is ‘made’ by Council.

Progress of the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan

2.3 In February 2018, BDBC designated the Burghclere Neighbourhood Area for the purpose of preparing a neighbourhood plan. The NP area covers the whole parish of Burghclere and lies solely within the Basingstoke and Deane LPA area. Burghclere Parish Council, as the “qualifying body”, submitted the draft BUR NP and supporting documents to BDBC in November 2019. Consultation on the submission version of the BUR NP took place from December 2019 to January 2020 (lasting 7 weeks).

2.4 Following the consultation on the submission version of the BUR NP, the council, with the consent of the Parish Council, appointed an independent examiner to Examine the Plan as per the relevant legislation (Schedule 4B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended). On 18 February 2020 the examiner advised both Burghclere Parish Council and Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council of three significant recommended modifications to the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan. In accordance with guidance to examiners in the ‘NPIERS Guidance to Service Users and Examiners’ the examiner sought additional comments over a two-week period on the three proposed modifications to the Plan. The option to comment on the proposed modifications closed in March 2020.

2.5 The Examiner’s Report was received in March 2020 and recommended that, subject to a number of proposed modifications which were required to ensure that the Plan met the basic conditions set out in the legislation, the BUR NP should proceed to referendum. The Portfolio Holder for Planning, Infrastructure and the Natural Environment agreed that the modifications should be implemented, and the NP moved to the next stage.

2.6 The next significant stage in the process was for a local referendum to be held in order for local residents to vote on whether or not they would like the Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Plan, as amended, to form part of the Development Plan for the Parish. In the event of a positive vote at referendum, the neighbourhood plan automatically forms part of the borough’s Development Plan, although the council still needs to go through the process of ‘making’ the Plan.

2.7 Ordinarily the referendum would be held within 56 days of the decision to proceed to referendum. However, due to the situation relating to COVID-19 at the time, a moratorium on election events, including Neighbourhood Plan referendums, was in place. As a result, the referendum on the plan had to be postponed until 6 May 2021, in line with the Local Government and Police and Crime Commissioner (Coronavirus) (Postponement of Elections and Referendums) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.

Page 55

3 of 7 2.8 The local referendum for the Burghclere NP took place on Thursday 6 May 2021. Of those who voted, 81.6% were in favour of the plan. The turnout of electors was 46.5%.

2.9 Section 38A(4)(a) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires the council to ‘make’ a neighbourhood plan if more than half of those voting in a referendum vote in favour of it. The making of a neighbourhood plan is therefore a legal requirement. There are only very narrow circumstances where the Plan should not be made, namely where adoption of the plan would breach, or otherwise be incompatible with, any EU or human rights obligations2. The council has assessed the BUR NP and concluded that the Plan, including its preparation, does not breach, and would not otherwise be incompatible with, any EU or human rights obligations. The Examiner’s Report also comes to the same conclusion in relation to those obligations. The LPA is therefore under a statutory duty to ‘make’ the Neighbourhood Plan as soon as reasonably practicable after the referendum has been held, and within eight weeks of the date of the Referendum.

2.1 As the BUR NP was subject to a positive vote at referendum, it will now be used in the determination of planning applications that fall within the parish of Burghclere. Its effectiveness will be monitored annually through the council’s Authority Monitoring Report. The parish council also have the option to update and/or review their neighbourhood plan in the future should they wish to do so.

3 Options Analysis

3.1 As outlined above, the making of the Plan is mandatory in light of a positive referendum result. The options in this regard are therefore limited. Not ‘making’ the plan would leave the council in breach of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2005 and the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 (as amended), which is not considered to be a justifiable option.

Corporate implications

4 Legal

4.1 The making of the Plan within an eight week time period is a statutory requirement. Therefore, the Plan needs to be ‘made’ by the council within that time period unless any of the reasons for not doing so have been satisfied. This is not the case and as there is no breach of EU or human rights obligations.

4.2 In light of the referendum result, the BUR NP now forms part of the Development Plan for the parish of Burghclere and will be used in the determination of planning applications.

4.3 The BUR NP will be subject to a statutory period (six weeks) within which a legal challenge can be lodged.

2 section 61E(8) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Act as amended Page 56

4 of 7 5 Financial

5.1 Once the BUR NP is ‘made’, in line with Community Infrastructure Levy regulations, 25% of any receipts generated from eligible development within the parish will be passed to the Parish Council. CIL came into effect on 25 June 2018.

6 Risk management

6.1 A risk assessment has been completed in accordance with the council’s risk management process and has identified no significant (Red or Amber) residual risks that cannot be fully minimised by existing or planned controls or additional procedures.

7 Equalities

7.1 The Examiner’s Report confirms that the Examiner is satisfied that the BUR NP does not breach the European Convention on Human Rights obligations.

7.2 When considering the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010, the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan has undertaken an Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA) and this is included in the Basic Conditions Statement which accompanied the Submission BUR NP. This assessment concluded that the BUR NP is generally positive for a range of protected interested groups.

7.3 The LPA has reviewed the EqIA undertaken by the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan group to consider the impact of the proposed BUR NP (with recommended modifications following Examination) on the protected characteristics and other groups. The LPA is content that the Burghclere NP would meet the requirements of Public Sector Equality Duty and the Equality Act 2010 and agrees that it would be generally positive for a range of protected characteristics groups. No adverse impacts have been identified.

7.4 The adoption of the BUR NP will be communicated through a variety of channels and the impact of the BUR NP will also need to be monitored to allow for any unforeseen issues to be identified and, where possible, addressed.

8 Consultation and communication

8.1 Following the Council decision, the parish council and others who asked to be informed, will be notified that the neighbourhood plan has been ‘made’. The plan and its supporting documents, including a decision statement, will be published on the council’s website and made available, in line with the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended) and the council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement. The plan will be available to view at the borough council offices, Basingstoke Discovery Centre and Newbury Library, as well as through being made available by the parish council itself should it so wish.

Page 57

5 of 7 8.2 In line with previous neighbourhood plans, the adoption of the Burghclere Neighbourhood will be communicated through the local media, the council’s social media channels and relevant online digital channels.

9 Climate change

9.1 ‘Making’ the Burghclere Neighourhood Plan will have a positive climate change impact, compared to not ‘making’ the plan.

9.2 The Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan adopts a positive approach to trying to reduce the impacts of climate change and is as positive as it is allowed to be by national planning policy in this regard (please see Examiners Report for further details). There are a number of policies within the neighbourhood plan which support the principles of sustainable development, including Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity and Sustainable Design Standards.

10 HR

10.1 There are no HR issues arising from this report.

Conclusion

11 Summary and reason for the decision

11.1 The local referendum on the Burghclere NP took place on Thursday 6th May 2021. Of those who voted, 81% were in favour of the Plan.

11.2 In light of the referendum results (more than 50% of the votes cast were in favour of the Plan), the BUR NP should be ‘made’ by Council within 8 weeks of the referendum.

11.3 The Neighbourhood Plan helps to set the planning framework for the borough and will assist in delivering the objectives of the Council Plan.

12 Alternative options considered

12.1 The making of the Neighbourhood Plan is a mandatory legal requirement following the positive outcome of the referendum (apart from in a narrow set of circumstances which are not relevant is this case). As such, the LPA is under a statutory duty to ‘make’ the Neighbourhood Plan. Consequently, there are not considered to be suitable alternative options available.

Date: 27 May 2021 Decision taken by: Council

Page 58

6 of 7 Lead officer Ruth Ormella, Head of Planning, Sustainability and Infrastructure Joanne Brombley, Planning Policy Manager Email: [email protected] Tel: 01256 845410 or Ext 2410 Report author Robyn Kelly, Planning Policy Officer Email: [email protected] Tel: 01256 845175 or Ext 2175 Version Council Dated 27 May 2021 Status Open It is considered that information contained within this report (and Confidentiality appendices) do not contain exempt information under the meaning of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, and therefore can be made public.

Page 59

7 of 7 This page is intentionally left blank

BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011 – 2029

© Richard Carrow

Published by Burghclere Parish Council for examination under the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended).

May 2021

Courtesy of Lottie Baker, Burghclere Primary School

Page 61

Guide to Reading this Plan

Of necessity, this Neighbourhood Plan is a detailed technical document. The purpose of this page is to explain the structure and help you find your way around the plan.

1. Introduction & Background This section explains the background to the Neighbourhood Plan.

2. The Neighbourhood Area This section details many of the features of the designated area.

3. Planning Policy Context This technical section relates this Plan to the National Planning Policy Framework and the planning policies of Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council.

4. Community Views on Planning Issues This section explains the community involvement that has taken place.

5. Vision, Objectives & Land Use Policies This is the key section. Firstly, it provides a statement on the Neighbourhood Plan Vision and Objectives. It then details Policies which are proposed to address the issues outlined in the Foreword and in Section 4. These Policies are listed on page 6. There are Policy Maps at the back of the plan to which the policies cross reference.

6. Implementation This section explains how the Plan will be implemented and future development guided and managed. It suggests projects which might be supported by the Community Infrastructure Levy, which the Parish Council will have some influence over. Finally, it deals with a number of issues which although relevant are outside the scope of a Neighbourhood Plan.

Page 62 2 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

2011 – 2029

May 2021

CONTENTS

Foreword

Preface

List of Policies

1. Introduction & Background 7

2. The Neighbourhood Area 11

3. Planning Policy Context 14

4. Community Views on Planning Issues 16

5. Vision, Objectives & Land Use Policies 18

6. Implementation 48

Policies Map & Insets 50

Schedule of Evidence 53

Appendix 1 - Design Statement 54

Page 63 3 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

FOREWORD

Burghclere is a beautiful rural parish in North Hampshire, popular not only for its proximity to major road and rail links around the South of England but also its wonderful rural setting with and North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It’s hardly surprising that many people want to live here. Being popular, however, comes at a price and the younger generation struggle to find houses they can afford. Meanwhile, an older generation, who wish to downsize and remain close to friends and family, cannot always find suitable housing for their needs.

The government has granted local communities an opportunity to create plans for future development within the parameters set by local planning authorities. Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council has set parishes housing targets within the Local Plan and, taking advantage of the former to meet the latter, we have developed a Neighbourhood Plan. Unlike the Village Design Statement drawn up in 2002 and on which we have drawn extensively, a neighbourhood plan allows us to decide where and what type of development should take place in our area. As it forms part of the Local Plan it also carries greater ‘weight’ in planning considerations and in particular against speculative planning proposals.

Parishioners have recognised the need to develop a positive, constructive vision for Burghclere and want to take control, as far as possible, over how growth will evolve. The Neighbourhood Plan describes how we can develop and protect the assets and strengths of the parish now and into the future. It has been designed to encourage sustainable development, enabling the parish to achieve the growth required of us, whilst protecting our important heritage and rural character. Specifically, it sets out one site for development in Burghclere and includes policies relating to the style and type of housing development envisaged. There are also policies regarding protection of the landscape, key views and biodiversity, and issues such as tourism and car parking.

We wanted to be ambitious. Indeed, we would wish to go further, particularly in respect of energy efficiency and mitigating the impact of climate change. Currently, existing legislation to which we have to conform does not permit all we had hoped to include. Looking ahead, consequences arising from Covid-19 might affect future development. Basingstoke’s Local Planning Update will result in a new Local Plan in around 3-4 years’ time, at which point we would expect to have to review ours. This will allow us an opportunity to cast a fresh eye over what we want and need to achieve next.

We could not have done this without your support. Heartfelt thanks to all who contributed to its preparation, in particular residents who attended the public meetings, completed questionnaires and visited our stand at village events. Your views have significantly shaped our work. I would like to thank the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group for all their hard work and valuable insight, the Parish Council for its support, and consultants ONeill Homer, who have contributed high quality professional expertise. We commend this plan to you.

Richard Carrow, Chair, Burghclere Parish Council

Page 64 4 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

PREFACE

Burghclere is a rural parish with a population of about 1,200 people living in over 450 houses spread over an area of approximately 8 square miles.

The built environment of the parish centres around the village of Burghclere itself with a number of dispersed hamlets such as , Holt, and Tothill, and other scattered housing settlements all of which are surrounded by mainly woodland and farmland. The A34 runs through the South and to the West side of the Parish, and the B4640 runs across the North West quadrant. A network of roads connects Burghclere village and its hamlets, some of which are used as ‘rat runs’ for through traffic.

The parish has 57 listed buildings, 10 scheduled monuments and 6 SSSIs. The southern portion of the parish lies within the North West Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Several local attractions draw tourists to the region, principal among them being Castle as well as Sandham Memorial Chapel in Burghclere itself. An extensive network of footpaths and bridleways, together with several commons (Herbert Plantation, Newtown and Earlstone) make the area very popular with walkers, cyclists and horse riders, as well young families who can experience nature on their doorstep.

Amongst those living within the parish are some who have done so all their lives and have strong family connections spanning generations. Others are more recent arrivals, often with young families, who commute to workplaces in London, Newbury or other towns nearby. With its established churches, pubs and Sports Club, older and recent residents alike enjoy a friendly community spirit, from which a variety of other clubs, societies and social networks have sprung. The attractive rural aspect, the quality and character of its built environment, coupled with its proximity to excellent transportation links make Burghclere a very desirable place to live.

Burghclere has grown incrementally over the years while retaining its rural character. We recognise that the parish will continue to grow to meet the demand for housing and the changing demographic shape of the region. Such growth should be sympathetic to the character of the parish, based on local needs and, as far as possible, benefit those who live and work in or have direct connections with the parish.

Through this Neighbourhood Plan we have an opportunity to influence how the parish will develop up to 2029. It now forms part of Basingstoke and Deane Council’s Plan and will consequently inform future development.

Page 65 5 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

LIST OF POLICIES

POLICY # POLICY PAGE #

B1 Burghclere Settlement Boundary 20

B2 Land off Harts Lane / Winchester Road 21

B3 Residential Garden Land 25

B4 Housing mix and tenure 27

B5 High Quality Design 28

B6 Sustainable Design Standards 29

B7 Local Heritage Assets 30

B8 Landscape 30

B9 Important Views 31

B10 Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity 36

B11 Local Green Spaces 41

B12 Community Facilities 44

B13 Tourism 44

B14 Car Parking 45

Page 66 6 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

1. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

1.1 Burghclere Parish Council has prepared a Neighbourhood Plan for the area designated by the local planning authority, Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, on 26 February 2018. The plan has been prepared in accordance with the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations of 2012 (as amended).

1.2 The area coincides with the parish boundary (Plan A).

1.3 The purpose of the Neighbourhood Plan is to set out a series of planning policies that will be used to determine planning applications in the area in the period to 2029. The Plan will form part of the development plan for the parish, alongside the Basingstoke & Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029. The Borough Council has recently started the process of reviewing its adopted Local Plan, however the neighbourhood plan is intended to cover the same period as the current Local Plan.

1.4 Neighbourhood Plans provide local communities, like Burghclere, with the chance to manage the quality of development of their areas. Once approved at a referendum, the Plan becomes a statutory part of the development plan for the area and will carry significant weight in how planning applications are decided. Plans must therefore contain only land use planning policies that can be used for this purpose. This often means that there are important issues of interest to the local community that cannot be addressed in a Plan if they are not directly related to planning.

1.5 Although there is considerable scope for the local community to decide on its planning policies, Neighbourhood Plans must meet certain ‘basic conditions’ before they come into force. In essence, the basic conditions are: • Having regard to national policies and advice contained in guidance issued by the Secretary of State, that it is appropriate to make the neighbourhood development plan; • That the making of the neighbourhood development plan contributes to the achievement of sustainable development; • That the making of the neighbourhood development plan is in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan for the area – in this case Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (or any part of that area); • The making of the neighbourhood development plan does not breach, and is otherwise compatible with, EU obligations; • Prescribed conditions are met in relation to the Plan and prescribed matters have been complied with in connection with the proposal for the neighbourhood plan. Burghclere Parish Council confirms there are no prescribed matters in relation to the Plan, and • The Conservation of Habitats and Species and Planning (Various Amendments) (England and Wales) Regulations 2018, which came into force on 28 December 2018 added a further Basic Condition. The making od the neighbourhood development plan does not breach the requirements of Chapter 8 of Part 6 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017(7).

1.6 The Parish Council consulted on a Pre-Submission Plan 17 September – 29 October 2019. Comments were received from local people and from some statutory bodies and landowners. It is clear there is majority support from the local Page 67 7 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

community for the Plan, but a few changes have been necessary to improve clarity and application of policy wording that ensures the Plan meets the Basic Conditions. A separate Consultation Statement sets out those changes and describes the overall process of formal and informal consultations carried out during the process.

The Referendum Plan

1.7 The Parish Council has demonstrated to an independent examiner that it has successfully engaged with the local community in preparing the Plan. The examiner is satisfied that it has, and considers the Plan meets the basic conditions and other statutory requirements.

1.8 A local referendum on the Plan was held on 6 May 2021 asking registered voters: “Do you want B&DBC to use the Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Plan to help it decide planning applications in the Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Area?”

1.9 The result of the referendum on a 46.5% turnout was announced on 7 May 2021 with 366 in favour and 81 against, giving an overall margin of approval of 81.8%. From this moment the Plan forms part of the local Development Plan.

Page 68 8 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Plan A: Designated Neighbourhood Area

Page 69 9 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) & the Habitats Regulations

1.8 Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council confirmed in its screening opinion of November 2018 that a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is considered to be required to accompany the Burghclere Neighbourhood Plan in accordance with the Environmental Assessment of Plans & Programmes Regulations 2004. A Draft Sustainability Appraisal Report (incorporating SEA) was consulted on alongside the Pre-Submission version of the Plan. This follows a scoping exercise that involved consultations with the statutory bodies and has resulted in a framework of relevant environmental, social and economic objectives being agreed to measure the attributes of the Plan. The final version of the SA/SEA report has been revised to take account of the comments received and is published separately alongside this Submission version of the Plan.

1.9 The screening opinion also confirmed that the Plan will not need to be subject to a Habitats Regulations Assessment in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended).

Page 70 10 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

2. THE NEIGHBOURHOOD AREA

2.1 Burghclere Parish is oblong in shape along its north-south axis and is located to the south of Newbury and Greenham Common. While Greenham Common has a defence related past, a growing Business Park has been developed on the built-up area of the site, and the remaining bunkers are used in film making. The historic market town of Newbury provides Burghclere with employment, shopping and other facilities and services.

2.2 The western edge and south of the parish lies within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) (see Plan B below) with extensive views to Ladle Hill and Beacon Hill to the south and south east. To the north is flatter terrain and extensive parcels of ancient woodland. The northern boundary runs along the River and the parish is surrounded by other settlements such as Whitchurch to the south, Highclere to the west, and and to the east.

Plan B: Environmental constraints in Burghclere

Page 71 11 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

2.3 The A34 runs north-south along the western side the parish, as does the disused Didcot to Southampton railway line. The Parish had two stations; Burghclere station at Old Burghclere and Highclere station in the village of Burghclere. With the railway line came the expansion of the parish.

2.4 The parish has a long history. There are Bronze Age barrows to the south of Beacon Hill, where there was an Iron Age settlement. There is mention of a church at Burghclere in the Domesday survey. It is thought that the parish developed at the southern end with the mediaeval village at Old Burghclere. Following the Black Death this was deserted and is now only visible as irregularities in the ground.

2.5 While the parish remains predominately rural, there is a distinctive change in landscape typology between the flatter terrain in the north and the highly visible landscape features in the south - Beacon Hill, Ladle Hill and Watership Down. Over the centuries the population has moved from the high chalk in the south to the lower lying areas in the north.

2.6 To the north is the village of Burghclere, smaller low-density hamlets and pockets of ancient woodland. The spread of development over the years has created several distinct settlement areas in addition to the main village of Burghclere and Old Burghclere. The population of the whole Parish was recorded as 1,152 and 450 dwellings in the Census 2011.

2.7 Whitway/West Street lies in the west of the parish, and Tothill, Sheepwash Lane, Heatherwold, Adbury Holt and Aldern Bridge in the north. The parish also contains a number of dispersed countryside estates such as Adbury Park Farm. While these settlements have very limited services, Old Burghclere retains a successful restaurant. To its east is part of Wergs Farm that runs over the parish boundary and forms part of Court Estate. Whitway also retains a successful pub. These smaller settlements identify themselves as part of the Burghclere community.

2.8 The parish has four schools, each having an extensive catchment area which is typical of rural areas, these are; Burghclere Primary School, Clere School (a Secondary School but with no sixth form), Burghclere Pre-School, and the independent St Michael’s School.

2.9 There are 57 listed buildings in the Parish, including the Grade I barn to the south west of the Grade II* Manor House, and the Grade I Church of All Saints at Old Burghclere and the Grade II* Earlstone Manor. Five of the scheduled ancient monuments known as the Seven Burrows lie to the north and east of Thorn Down, four further scheduled ancient monuments forming part of Beacon Hill and Ladle Hill. The Grade II* Earlstone Manor lies between Old Burghclere and the village of Burghclere. The Grade I Sandham Memorial Chapel, a National Trust property, lies in the village of Burghclere. A very small part of the Historic Park and Garden of Highclere Park lies within the parish, with the majority lying to the south west, outside the parish.

2.10 Part of the parish along the northern boundary with the River Enborne and its tributaries lies within Flood Zone 3, an area with a high probability of flooding. There is an extensive Mineral Safeguarding Area around the village of Burghclere (see Plan C overleaf).

12 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 72 PLAN 2011-2029

Page 73 Page

Plan C: Mineral Safeguarding Area

13 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 The parish lies within the Basingstoke & Deane Borough area in the county of Hampshire.

National Planning Policy

3.2 The latest National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published by the Government in 2019 is an important guide in the preparation of local plans and neighbourhood plans. The following paragraphs of the NPPF 2019 are considered especially relevant:

• Housing Requirement (§65) • Rural Housing (§77) • Rural Economy (§83) • Healthy and Safe Communities (§91) • Community Facilities (§92) • Local Green Space (§99 - §101) • High Quality Design (§125) • The Natural Environment (§170 - §172) • Biodiversity (§174) • The Historic Environment (§185)

Strategic Planning Policy

3.3 The Neighbourhood Plan must be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the development plan. The development plan primarily comprises the Basingstoke & Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029 adopted in May 2016. Its key policies applying to the Parish are:

• Policy SS1 Scale and Distribution of New Housing – defines a settlement boundary for Burghclere (see Plan D); • Policy SS5 Neighbourhood Plans – requires Burghclere to provide 10 dwellings over the plan period.

3.4 There are also a wide range of development management policies:

• Policy CN3 Housing Mix for Market Housing – requires market housing to be made up of type and size that addresses local requirements; • Policy CN8 Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities – seeking to protect and enhance community facilities; • Policy EM1 Landscape – reflecting the national importance of the North Wessex Downs AONB and its setting and requiring proposals to adhere to criteria set out in the North Wessex Downs AONB Management Plan; • Policy EM4 Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation – seeking to protect and enhance biodiversity; • Policy EM5 Green Infrastructure – seeking to protect and enhance green infrastructure assets;

Page 74 14 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

• Policy EM10 Delivering High Quality Development – setting out criteria to secure a robust design-led approach; • Policy EM11 The Historic Environment – seeking to conserve and enhance the quality of the historic environment; • Policy EP4 Rural Economy – supporting economic uses in the countryside; • Policy EP5 Rural tourism – supporting tourism development in the countryside.

3.5 The Hampshire County Council Minerals and Waste Plan 2030 adopted in October 2013 also forms part of the development plan. A key policy applying in Burghclere is Policy 15 Safeguarding - mineral resources which defines several Minerals Safeguarding Areas (MSA) in the Parish. These are areas where an additional test will be applied in order that proven resources are not needlessly sterilised by non-mineral development, whilst not creating a presumption that resources defined will be worked, and where appropriate regeneration can be facilitated (see Plan C).

3.6 There are also ‘made’ neighbourhood plans in the vicinity which form part of the development plan, notably at Kingsclere. None contain policies that are of direct relevance to this Neighbourhood Plan.

3.7 In areas within the North Wessex Downs AONB the Development Policies (DE01 – DE23) of the AONB Management Plan 2019 – 2024 should also be given full consideration.

3.8 Recent developments in Burghclere include six dwellings at the Pound Lane (Sandham Place) development and as Burghclere is required to provide 10 dwellings over the plan period, the village would only need to identify 4 more. However, the threshold for development adjacent to the Policy Settlement Boundary to count towards the required number of housing is 5.

3.9 In addition to this, the Neighbourhood Plan is being prepared prior to a review of the adopted Local Plan, details of which have not yet been published. However, it is anticipated that Basingstoke and Deane will have to provide additional homes to that planned for in the adopted Local Plan.

.

15 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 75 PLAN 2011-2029

4. COMMUNITY VIEWS ON PLANNING ISSUES

4.1 Two informal consultations have been conducted with residents. The first was a ‘Have Your Say’ afternoon on 6th April 2018 followed by a presentation on neighbourhood planning by a Planning Officer from B&DBC and a Q&A session afterwards. Over 50 attended during the afternoon and over 70 the evening presentation. Concerns raised at the Q&A session included loss of village rural character, where houses might be built, support for smaller affordable homes not big mansions and whether the local council might override local opinion. The second took place during two Drop In sessions at the Portal Hall in December 2018. Over 80 attended and 53 questionnaires were returned.

4.2 There was significant support for affordable housing for first time buyers, suitable housing for older people to live independently, those with additional needs and for local people to upsize or downsize. Residents were also asked to indicate their preferred sites and least favoured sites and results collated ranking the sites by preference. The site preferred was the parcel of land at the SW end of the village (Site A or BUR 006 in the 2018 SHELAA). There was significant support for designating green spaces and protecting views, and for tourism and additional local business, although somewhat reduced.

4.3 The following broad conclusions emerged:

• There was strong support for the proposed (10-15) housing numbers. Among the comments was concern that some of the sites could accommodate more than this number. Several thought that more houses might be needed. • A large proportion felt that the mix of criteria selected was right. A few thought sites should also encourage walking to school. • Of the 4 sites that best met the criteria, a significant majority considered Site A (BUR006) best met the criteria, followed by Sites F, H & I. A number noted that Sites A and F are in the AONB and at the entrance of the village from the South. Some concern was raised about site sizes (in particular F & H). Asked whether any of the excluded sites were more suitable, over half said no. • There was substantial support for the use of Parish land to be used for affordable housing for local people. • A significant majority supported the proposed mix of design, heritage and key views policies to preserve and enhance Burghclere’s rural character. • There was significant agreement for the proposals that protect local green spaces, green infrastructure and community facilities and allow for future improvement. • Support for business policies and a rural business hub was expressed. A few suggested a shop or café might be considered. • The proposed policy on tourism gained similar backing and over half thought that the parking and traffic policies were viable. Views varied as to what to do about traffic and parking; a number thought the Primary School needed more parking, but there was no unanimity on a solution.

4.4 Consultation with local schools, businesses, landowners and other stakeholders took place between February and June 2019 and the outcome of

16 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 76 PLAN 2011-2029

this consultation is considered to be reflected in the plan and its policies along with the views of the local community from previous consultations.

4.5 Paragraph 1.7 of this Plan summarises the outcome of the Pre-Submission Plan consultation. A more detailed account is set out in the Consultation Statement which accompanies this plan.

4.6. On 8 July 2019 a land promoter, Falcon Developments, submitted an outline planning application for 35 houses on Site B/BUR003 only 4 days after notification that B&DBC had lost its 5-year land supply. This meant that Policy SS1of the Local Plan was superseded by Paragraph 11 of the NPPF (the presumption in favour of sustainable development). After a public meeting on 18 September 2019, at which all 109 parishioners present bar one abstention voted against Falcon’s application, the Parish Council submitted an objection to B&DBC noting, inter alia, that it undermined the principles of neighbourhood planning by being premature to the Burghclere Parish Neighbourhood Plan. B&DBC rejected the application in November 2019, which Falcon Developments appealed. The Planning Inspectorate held a Hearing on 3 December 2020 with all interested parties and after due consideration dismissed the appeal.

17 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 77 PLAN 2011-2029

5. VISION, OBJECTIVES & LAND USE POLICIES

Vision

5.1 The vision of the neighbourhood area in 2029 is:

“Burghclere village has grown whilst retaining its special rural qualities. Growth has not undermined the landscape and has preserved the essential character of the parish, village and outlying hamlets, and important views into and from the countryside.

New homes have helped address local need and sustain the demand for cherished community facilities – the Portal Hall, recreation ground and the local schools.

The design of new homes on the edge of and on infill sites within the village respect local character. There is a wider range of entry level housing types that enable younger people to find homes and older households to downsize. There are also now more affordable homes in the village.

Technological changes have resulted in increased use of fuel-efficient and electric modes of transport, benefiting the environment. These also allow more working from home rather than reliance on commuting. The growth of new micro-businesses throughout the parish means the parish is more self-contained.

Recognition of the benefits of rural biodiversity has enhanced the connectivity between the village and the countryside. The development of the parish has not only avoided harm to its biodiversity but has also helped create new ecological value.

The tourism potential of the area has been realised and has led to new local employment opportunities. Beacon Hill, Sandham Memorial Chapel and activities at the Recreation Ground continue to thrive. There are improved village car parking facilities.”

Objectives

5.2 The key objectives of the Neighbourhood Plan are: Housing: • To help meet housing needs by supporting the delivery of new housing in accordance with B&DBC Policy SS5. (Polices B1& 2) • To help meet the need for smaller homes by securing a more appropriate mix of housing in new developments (Policy B4) • To ensure any new housing is built on sites and at densities that would not harm the prevailing character of the area in which it is set or the amenity of nearby properties. (Policies B5, 6, 8, 9, 13)

18 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 78 PLAN 2011-2029

Design, Heritage and Landscape

• To ensure all new development respects the particular character of the area in which it takes place in terms of design, layout, materials and sustainability. (Policies B3, 5 & 6) • To protect and enhance the parish’s heritage, including the North Wessex Downs AONB, listed buildings and other locally important buildings and structures across the parish. (Policies B5, 7 & 8) Environment • To protect and enhance the most valued open spaces for the use of the community within and adjacent to the settlement policy boundary. (Policy B11) • To maintain and improve biodiversity and the quality of the natural environment. (Policy B10) Business & Tourism • To support the local economy and encourage opportunities for smaller businesses to grow and develop in appropriate locations across the parish including the potential for a rural business hub and working from home. (Policy B2) • To support and encourage tourist attractions without detriment to the amenity of the village and parish. (Policy B13) Parking • To ensure appropriate parking provision is made within any new development and that better parking is provided within Burghclere village. (Policy B14)

Land Use Policies

5.3 The following policies relate to the development and use of land in the designated Neighbourhood Area of Burghclere. They focus on specific planning matters that are of greatest interest to the local community, especially in seeking to accommodate its housing requirement figure and securing high quality design.

5.4 There are many parts of the Parish that are not affected by these policies and there are many other policy matters that have been left to the Local Plan to cover. This has avoided unnecessary repetition of policies between the two plans, though they have a mutual, helpful inter-dependence.

5.5 Each policy is numbered and titled, and it is shown in bold italics. Where necessary, the area to which it will apply is shown on the Policies Map attached to the document. After each policy is some supporting text that explains the purpose of the policy, how it will be applied and, where helpful, how it relates to other development plan policies.

19 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 79 PLAN 2011-2029

Policy B1: Burghclere Settlement Boundary (BSB)

The Neighbourhood Plan defines a settlement boundary at Burghclere, as shown on the Policies Map.

Development proposals within the defined settlement boundary will be supported, provided they accord with policies of the development plan.

Outside the Settlement Boundary is considered to be countryside where other development plan policies and national policies apply.

5.6 The policy defines the extent of the Burghclere Settlement Boundary (BSB) for the purpose of applying Local Plan Policy SS1 – Scale and Distribution of New Housing which sets out the principles of development within settlement boundaries and the surrounding countryside. A map showing the original Settlement Policy Boundary and new Settlement Boundary is at Plan D. Maps displayed subsequently will show the new Settlement Boundary.

5.7 Burghclere Village is surrounded by sensitive landscape that seeks to be protected from larger scale developments threatening the rural character of the area. It is therefore crucial that new developments remain in and around the current built-up area, to minimize the impact they would have on the landscape.

5.8 The policy sets the spatial strategy for the neighbourhood plan. Its objectives are to allow sustainable growth to meet its local housing requirement figure, an additional quantum of housing providing flexibility for future housing growth, over the Plan period while also protecting the integrity of the rural character of the village. The revised settlement boundary therefore accommodates the site allocation proposed by Policy B2 which will deliver at least 15 new homes and will therefore make a positive contribution to meeting housing requirements in the Borough in this plan period and beyond.

5.9 The boundary is principally derived from the defined Settlement Policy Boundary provided for by Policy SS1. Its purpose is to clearly translate the BSB in the adopted Local Plan boundary drawn to incorporate the site allocation of Policy B2 and the 6 dwellings recently completed at Sandham House off Pound Lane. It therefore updates the settlement boundary defined on the Policies Map of the Local Plan. The Policy also allows for the continuing growth of the village through suitable infill sites. The suitability of sites for infill development will be judged against the design policies of the development plan.

20 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 80 PLAN 2011-2029

Plan D: Existing and revised Burghclere Settlement Boundary (BSB)

Policy B2: Land off Harts Lane / Winchester Road

The Neighbourhood Plan allocates 0.89 Ha of land north of Harts Lane for a mix of residential, employment and blue/green infrastructure uses as shown on the Policies Map. Development proposals will be supported, provided the following key requirements are met:

i. The residential scheme delivers at least 15 dwellings comprising a mix of open market and affordable homes in accordance with Local Plan policies with an emphasis on 2 and 3 bed homes suitable for first time buyers, those looking to rent their first home, retired estate workers and downsizers; ii. The employment scheme consists of a single storey B1 ’flexible workspace’ of about 150m2 forming a ‘rural business hub; iii. The provision of informal and formal recreation space to the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council’s adopted standards, including a Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP), if there is a proven need, which is accessible to children from the village; iv. A landscape strategy is prepared, and the layout and heights of buildings have full regard to the Local Plan policy requirements, the location of the land within the North Wessex Downs AONB and the setting of heritage assets; v. Mature trees and hedgerows forming the site boundary are retained unless their removal is essential;

21 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 81 PLAN 2011-2029

vi. A Noise Impact Assessment is prepared and where noise mitigation is recommended this is implemented in accordance with specifications to be agreed with the Local Authority; vii. A biodiversity strategy is prepared in accordance with the development plan, which delivers a ‘net gain’ in overall biodiversity value on site; and a drainage strategy is prepared and agreed with the Lead Local Flood Authority; viii. Pedestrian and cycling access is provided off Harts Lane to a specification to be agreed with the Highways Authority; ix. Vehicle access is made from Harts Lane in a location and of a type which reflects the rural setting to be agreed with the Highways Authority; x. Layout, character and materials will reflect the local rural character and settlement edge setting of the site and external spaces will be designed to take account of solar orientation for amenity and sustainability purposes; xi. The layout will be designed to create a sense of arrival within the scheme and provide a community focus for residents and encourage pedestrian and cycle links to the village; xii. Building form and roofscape will be designed to be sympathetic to the site’s characteristics and to respect the AONB setting; and xiii. The layout has regard to the need for utility providers to access infrastructure on the land for future maintenance and upgrading.

5.10 The policy allocates land for a mixed-use scheme north of Harts Lane. The settlement boundary of Policy B1 has been modified to incorporate the site and the scheme is expected to deliver at least 15 dwellings to meet the residual housing requirements of Policy SS5, as well as making provision for an additional quantum of housing to meet additional local needs and provide the village with the protection of §14 of the NPPF.

5.11 The site lies just within the North Wessex Downs AONB between the A34 Newbury by-pass and the AONB boundary. See Plan E. The Parish Council are aware of their obligations under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CROW Act 2000 Section 85) and the ‘great weight’ attached to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The policy requirements seek to ensure that the potential for adverse landscape impacts are successfully mitigated. A Landscape and Visual Appraisal concludes the site is of low-medium value both intrinsically and as a contributor to the character of its setting, given its current condition as an uncultivated field and high boundary vegetation adjacent to the urbanising feature of the A34. The appraisal also confirms there is limited ‘intervisibility’ between the site and the main body of the AONB.

5.12 While the scale of the proposed allocation is limited, the socio-economic benefits of the scheme are considered to provide the ‘exceptional circumstances’ as required by paragraph 172 of the NPPF to outweigh any harm to the designated landscape. The AONB Background Paper (in the evidence base) indicates that the proposal is not considered to be ‘Major Development’1. This judgment is, however, a matter for the Local Planning Authority to conclude as decision-maker. BDBC has advised that in their opinion the allocation does not meet the test of ‘Major

1 ‘Major Development’ as defined by Footnote 55 of the NPPF. 22 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 82 PLAN 2011-2029

Development’. The scale of development proposed and the setting of the allocation (severed from the main body of the AONB by the A34) is not considered to significantly affect the character and appearance of the North Wessex Downs AONB given the particular characteristics of the site.

5.13 The policy sets out a series of key development principles to ensure the potential effects of development are addressed and to ensure the scheme is of high quality and delivers clear community benefits. The National Planning Policy Framework expands upon the fundamental principles of good design to define what is expected for well-designed places and explain how planning policies and decisions should support this. The policy is drafted to ensure there is sufficient clarity to enable the policy to inform Development Management considerations and to avoid ambiguity2; the development principles outlined in the policy provide such clarity.

5.14 The supporting evidence indicates that it is possible to avoid or mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects by ensuring compliance with the requirements of the policy. Although not a specific policy requirement the land owner/developer is encouraged to engage with the Parish Council and the community in the preparation of a design brief prior to the submission of any application. This responds to the heightened emphasis placed on design standards and design quality now anticipated through the Written Ministerial Statement dated 1st October 2019 which accompanied the publication of the National Design Guide and by paragraphs 124 and 130 of the NPPF.

5.15 The policy also encourages a 'co-design' approach is undertaken prior to a planning application being submitted as advocated by NPPF 124 and paragraph 17 of the National Design Guide. This is to ensure the scheme retains a sense of community 'ownership' as described by policy L3 (paragraph 160) of the Guide.

5.16 An objective of the Neighbourhood Plan includes meeting the need for smaller homes and the policy therefore seeks to encourage an emphasis on homes suitable for those looking to buy or rent their first home, retired estate workers and downsizers. No conclusion has yet been reached, but the policy requires consideration to be given to deliver a proportion of the homes in this way in line with policy B5 and to afford opportunities for people with a local connection to gain access to local housing to meet their needs. Moreover, the delivery of affordable homes delivered through a Community Land Trust (CLT) would be supported by the parish council.

5.17 The allocation also includes the formation of a rural business hub. The Local Plan supports the continued expansion of traditional rural enterprises such as rural crafts, tourism / day visitors and rural leisure pursuits. The BDBC Economic Needs Assessment (Feb 2018) confirms that while the vast majority of the existing employment floorspace stock and recent employment related developments have taken place in Basingstoke town, business space is also available in the rest of the predominantly rural parts of the Borough which provide opportunities for local jobs. Business floorspace in Burghclere, however, is in short supply and floorspace at Beacon House adjacent to this site is fully occupied. The Economic Needs Assessment confirms (paragraph 6.85) that the demand for incremental small-scale

2 PPG Paragraph: 041 ID:41-041-20140306. 23 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 83 PLAN 2011-2029

growth in flexible B type uses of a modest scale (under 500 sq. m) will continue into the future and small-scale demand could be fostered at the neighbourhood scale as proposed by this policy.

5.18 The approach taken in the policy avoids the vagaries of leaving such a requirement to be dealt with as a development management matter (which as the Economic Needs Assessment also confirms is a process that small scale enterprises are unlikely to engage with) while delivering wider community benefits for Burghclere by providing opportunities for homeworkers to expand their business activities in the village. This in turn will help to reduce the need to travel to employment further afield. The 2011 census indicates about 15% of residents work from home and the average distance travelled to work by residents of the Parish is 24.7km of which just under 70% of journeys are by car. (Source: Census 2011 table QS701 & 702EW).

5.19 If no progress is being made to secure the operation of the Business Hub, then consideration will be given to how this use may be secured. This may include consideration by the Parish Council of accepting operational responsibility/ownership of the Hub for employment purposes or wider community functions. However, the Rural Business Hub is based on an existing proven and viable model in a nearby Parish. The operator of that Hub has indicated the proposal is of a size and location to meet a demand in the local area and has confirmed their interest in taking the Hub forward as a commercial operation. Survey work to scope demand has revealed 88% of 40 respondents would anticipate using such a facility ranging from full-time to several times a year. The availability of a meeting room drew significant interest and one that could be put to other purposes such as therapy, craft workshops etc. 77% of respondents were from Burghclere and surrounding districts demonstrating support for this scheme.

5.20 The modest scale and single storey requirement of the building is to ensure such a proposal remains both viable and accessible by reducing the costs associated with DDA compliance. As such the policy is a deliverable response to the aspirational requirements set out in policies EP4 and 5 of the adopted Local Plan and paragraphs 83 and 84 of the NPPF.

5.21 The policy requirements reflect the development brief provided to the land promoter, who have confirmed the policy and the development principles it contains are deliverable and that there are no constraints that would impact on scheme viability.

24 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 84 PLAN 2011-2029

Plan E: allocated site and revised SPB

5.22 The work on the Vision and Objectives, and the Sustainability Appraisal, provides the basis for how the village can evolve in a sustainable way in the coming years. A number of objectives were generated to develop a clear spatial understanding of the neighbourhood area. The most important principle is that future growth must continue to lie adjacent to the defined settlement boundary to be in ‘general conformity’ with the development plan. The other spatial principles comprise protecting the integrity of the rural character of the village; minimising local traffic congestion; utilising access to and from existing infrastructure; and having convenient access to the strategic road and rail network. This has culminated in the proposed housing site allocation.

5.23 In the December 2018 consultation, the community indicated their support for this approach, including a majority who supported the proposed site allocation on land off Harts Lane / Winchester Road. The Borough Council has confirmed that this allocation will meet in full the housing requirement figure for the neighbourhood area up to 2029 (as per paragraph 65 of the NPPF).

Policy B3: Residential Garden Land

Where planning permission is required, development proposals on residential garden land within the Settlement Boundary will be supported subject to the following criteria:

i. they maintain the prevailing character and appearance of buildings in their immediate locality;

25 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 85 PLAN 2011-2029

ii. they reflect the scale, mass, design and layout of existing residential dwellings; iii. they safeguard the amenities of adjacent residential dwellings and their curtilages; iv. they provide off-street parking to development plan standards; v. they have appropriate and safe access to the highway network; and vi. any loss of biodiversity value on the site will be fully mitigated, and measures to enhance biodiversity through habitat creation or improvement are incorporated.

5.24 This policy sets out the Plan’s approach to potential development on residential garden land (RGL).

5.25 The development plan is silent on policy to resist inappropriate development on RGL. The policy therefore is intended to reflect NPPF paragraph 70 and 122(d) by establishing local criteria that may be applied for applications for the redevelopment of RGL within the Burghclere settlement boundary.

5.26 In no way does this policy affect the rights of the owners to continue using it as garden land; nor does it prevent householders from carrying out the various forms of minor development for which planning permission is deemed to be granted under the terms of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order.

26 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 86 PLAN 2011-2029

Policy B4: Housing mix and tenure

Proposals for residential development will be expected to provide a mix of dwelling types and sizes to address the nature of local needs and contribute to the objective of creating a mixed and balanced community. To achieve this objective, new residential development will seek to include in their housing mix, a majority of 2 and 3 bed dwellings. Affordable housing should seek to include a tenure suitable for first time buyers, those looking to rent their first home and downsizers.

5.27 Local Plan policy CN3 adopts a flexible approach to housing mix, and states that proposals will be permitted where the mix of market housing includes a range of house types and sizes to address local requirements. The policy is intended to contribute towards a mixed and balanced community in line with paragraph 62 of the NPPF. This policy is intended to give local effect to policy CN3 by setting a specific requirement for all new homes in the Parish. It is necessary in order to start to rebalance the current mix of homes so that it better reflects local need.

5.28 The council’s SHMA states that future projections show that smaller units with two or three bedrooms are preferred in the borough with less need identified for four-bedroom dwellings. This requirement is reflected in the Basingstoke and Deane Housing SPD (adopted July 2018) which acknowledges the borough-wide requirement for 2- and 3-bedroom homes, due to the borough’s aging population and the trend towards smaller households. In general terms the Neighbourhood Plan should deliver the requirement for affordable housing in line with B&DBC requirements while adopting the flexibility set out in policy CN3 for any housing scheme to meet the specific local requirements evidenced for the Parish.

5.29 The existing stock of 4 bed houses in Burghclere is significantly higher than in the more urban areas of the Borough; the Parish having the second highest percentage of 4 bed or larger dwellings in the district (49%). This has been exacerbated in recent years by a further increase in the proportion of 4 bed or larger dwellings being built. Since 2003, 45 dwellings have been built in Burghclere and of these 23 are 4 or 5 bed (51%). This evidence demonstrates the continuing imbalance in the local housing stock. While over the lifetime of the plan this policy will only marginally influence the balance of the housing stock, it is considered to be a necessary step to secure a more balanced community in the longer term, and provide opportunities for younger people and ‘downsizers’ to be able to access housing which otherwise the market would not deliver.

5.30 Local Plan policy CN1 simply requires a tenure split of affordable homes to be 70% rented and 30% intermediate products. The Neighbourhood Plan requires schemes to consider those products within this percentage split that suit first time buyers, those looking to rent their first home and downsizers. The policy also encourages landowners and their future development partners to give full consideration to the desire by the Parish Council to see a proportion of new homes through community led schemes involving housing, small business units and other appropriate community uses, which may involve a community led housing model such as a Community Land trust, or equivalent body for which an appropriate lettings policy will be agreed with the Borough Council. There is local community support for this approach. Unlike traditional forms of development, such 27 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 87 PLAN 2011-2029

development is controlled by the community, for the community. If the development does not have community support, it will not happen. While there is no specific mention of community-led housing in the NPPF, paragraph 61 indicates policies should be sufficiently flexible to meet a range of tenures. Where housing is not delivered in this way, the adopted Basingstoke and Deane Local Lettings Policy for the Burghclere area will continue to apply.

Policy B5: High Quality Design

Proposals for development will be supported, provided they are of high quality and positively contribute to the character and distinctiveness of the Parish, having regard to guidance in the Burghclere NP – Design Statement (Appendix1 in this Plan). Development proposals, including alterations and extensions, will be supported, provided they are visually attractive and have full regard to the distinctive character of the Parish and existing design features such as: i. the common use of hip roof forms and the retention of chimney-stacks whether decorative or operational, and the use of these as important features on new large expanses of roof; ii. the common use of brick, tile hanging, and natural slate in building materials; iii. the weather-boarded elevations of traditional farm buildings and the occasional use of thatch on older buildings contributing to the diverse character of the area; iv. the important role broad-leaved trees and native hedges play in defining the overall character of the area. Within Burghclere village, as indicated at Annex A to the Burghclere NP – Design Statement, in addition to the principles set out above, development proposals will be supported where they have full regard to the following: v. the importance of defining the essential character of the village with dwellings set back from the main road; vi. the importance of the setting of heritage assets, other buildings and structures, open spaces, mature trees and tall hedges to defining the village centre in front of the Portal Hall and Church of Ascension at the junction of Church Lane and Harts Lane; vii. the importance of trees and hedges along the frontage boundaries of most plots in softening the streetscape, requiring landscaping and access proposals of schemes to avoid, or minimise the loss of existing vegetation, or to provide new trees and tall hedges if currently absent; viii. the importance of unobstructed views from the village to the surrounding countryside in creating a rural ambience; ix. the importance of wooded areas in creating a feeling of seclusion and intimacy. Proposals within the North Wessex Downs AONB should also have regard to the criteria set out in the AONB Management Plan.

5.31 The NPPF contains a heightened emphasis on design standards in new developments. Paragraph 124 states: "The creation of high-quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve”. Meanwhile, paragraph 130 confirms that “permission should be refused for

28 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 88 PLAN 2011-2029

development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions”.

5.32 The policy therefore establishes the importance of high quality design and the need for new development to reflect the special qualities and local distinctiveness of the Parish. Adopting such an approach is intended to ensure that new development is well grounded and creates a ‘positive sense of place’3 and more likely to be acceptable to the community. The policy therefore places additional local emphasis to the design quality principles of the Basingstoke and Deane Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document adopted in July 2018. In turn, it complements, but does not replace, Local Plan Policy EM10 - Delivering High Quality Development. Policy B7 highlights the particular characteristics of the Parish to ensure all new development contributes to local distinctiveness as required by paragraph 2 of policy EM10. In addition, the North Wessex Downs AONB Management Plan (2019-2024) includes a series of policies. Proposals within the AONB should, when adopted, give consideration to development policies criteria of the AONB Management Plan.

5.33 The adopted Village Design Statement October 2002 has been updated by the Steering Group. The policy therefore includes a series of design principles drawn from the revised Design Statement of the village of Burghclere. These principles set out the features of the village that make it distinctive from others. It requires that development proposals demonstrate, where relevant to the nature and location of the proposal that regard has been paid to these principles. The revised Design Statement falls within the definition of policy EM10 paragraph 2a.

Policy B6: Sustainable Design Standards

Proposals for all development must be well designed and where appropriate contribute to health and well-being. Where appropriate, the design of proposals should have regard to the 10 characteristics of ‘well-designed places’ set out in the National Design Guide.

Non-residential proposals will be expected to make the fullest contribution to minimising carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the energy hierarchy and make efficient use of natural resources (including water), by making the most of natural systems to reduce vulnerability to climate change impacts over the lifetime of the development.

5.34 Local planning authorities are bound by the legal duty set out in Section 19 of the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, as amended by the 2008 Planning Act, to ensure that taken as whole, planning policy contributes to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change. This duty signals the priority to be given to climate change in plan-making. In discharging this duty, the Plan should have regard to paragraph 149 of the NPPF and ensure that policies and decisions are in line with the objectives and provisions of the Climate Change Act 2008 (Section 1) and support the National Adaptation Programme. For the sake of clarity, this means that both local plans and neighbourhood plans should be able to demonstrate how their policies contribute to the requirements of the Climate Change Act.

3 National Design Guide paragraph 38. 29 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 89 PLAN 2011-2029

5.35 The policy also responds to the recent signing into law of the legally binding national target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 and the need to plan new development in ways to avoid vulnerability to climate change impacts in line with NPPF paragraph 150. These are issues which will become ever more prominent during the life of this Plan. While different rules apply to residential and non- residential premises, it should be noted that in development plan policies local planning authorities can set energy performance standards for new housing or the adaptation of building to provide dwellings that are higher than the building regulations, but only up to the equivalent of Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. Moreover they are not restricted in setting energy performance standards above building regulations for non-housing developments4.

Policy B7: Local Heritage Assets

The Neighbourhood Plan identifies the following buildings as Local Heritage Assets, as shown on the Policies Maps, for the purpose of applying development plan policy on non-designated heritage assets:

i. Ashold Farm; ii. White Roding; iii. Sandham House; iv. Heath House; v. Frogmill; vi. The Croft; vii. Folly Cottages and viii. The Old School Cottage.

5.36 The policy identifies a number of buildings in the Parish that, whilst not designated as listed buildings, either have some local heritage value for the purposes of applying Local Plan Policy EM11 on the Historic Environment (see Inset Map 2). When the Village Design Statement (VDS) was compiled in 2001, an informal survey was carried out and a number of buildings were listed separately that recognised their uniqueness but conferred no special privileges or protection. This list was submitted to B&DBC with the VDS who, in 2007 compiled a ‘Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest Burghclere’ (BAHI). Another survey was carried out in 2018 and a further set were identified as shown on the Policy Map. These are described in the Revised Design Statement included in the evidence base.

Policy B8: Landscape

New development will be supported where it is demonstrated that it is sympathetic to the character and visual amenity of the local landscape, the features that characterise the Parish and the setting of the village in the wider landscape in accordance with Local Plan Policy EM1.

Features include the open downland character to the south of the Parish and woodlands, hedges, wildlife corridors including water features, traditional orchards and other natural environment and heritage assets.

4 Planning Policy Guidance on Climate Change, March 2019. 30 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 90 PLAN 2011-2029

5.37 The policy refines Policy EM1 of the Local Plan by identifying at a local scale key landscape and heritage-related attributes that form an essential part of the character of the parish and should be read alongside Policies B11 and B12. All proposals for development should have regard to the BDBC Landscape Character Assessment and the guidance set out in the BDBC Landscape, Biodiversity and Trees SPD. In doing so the policy conforms with the NPPF which sets out the Government’s objective to ‘Conserve and Enhance the Natural and Historic Environment’ and to pursue these objectives at a local level (NPPF §170 and §185), and to conserve and enhance landscape and scenic beauty (§172).

5.38 The Basingstoke and Deane Landscape Character Assessment (2001) describes the Clere Scarp Character Area as a linear east-west oriented and distinct Middle Chalk escarpment at the upper at the southern edge of the study area, rising to 261m AOD at Beacon Hill. It is associated with National Character Area 129 Thames Basin Heaths and JCA 130 Hampshire Downs. As well as the distinctive escarpment, some of the key characteristics of the landscape are its pastoral steep slopes, floristically-rich grassland and ancient woodland and highly visible archaeological remains. The Wayfarers Walk long distance walking route and quiet, rural and empty character with high scenic quality as a result of its dramatic topography is reflected in its designation as an AONB, with ‘memorable’ long distance views. The elevation of the dramatic scarp also affords panoramic views northwards across the lower lying land across the Parish. The area is described as having a medium-high degree of tranquillity, which diminishes at locations adjacent to the A34.

5.39 The Parish also contains extensive environmental assets with the majority of the Parish containing designations in some form or another. The southern half of the Parish falls within the North Wessex Downs AONB which is where the three SSSIs (Beacon Hill, Ladle Hill and Old Burghclere Lime Quarry) are located. Pockets of Ancient Woodland and Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) are mostly concentrated in the northern and central parts of the Parish. Policy B9: Important Views

The Neighbourhood Plan identifies Important Views on Plans F-J. Development proposals within Burghclere Parish that are located within or immediately adjoining an Important View will only be supported if it can be demonstrated that the key features of the view can continue to be enjoyed including distant buildings, areas of landscape and the juxtaposition of the village edge and surrounding countryside.

Development proposals which would have a significant adverse visual impact on an identified Important View will not be supported.

5.40 It is important that all new development is well designed in order to protect the existing character of the Parish. This policy and the plans overleaf identify a series of views from public vantage points within and around the edge of the village, as well as from around the Parish that are considered especially important by local people in defining the relationship between the village and the surrounding countryside. Special consideration is given to how the NWD AONB relates to the village and overall parish setting and particular note has been taken of views into and out of the village including views within the NWD AONB. It conforms with NPPF §170 and with the emerging NWD AONB Management Plan 31 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 91 PLAN 2011-2029

2019-2024 in so far as it contributes to and enhances the natural and local environment.

5.41 To identify views worthy of protection several assessment criteria were used, taking into account accessibility from a public Right of Way, the view showing a range of features rather than one particular object, and the view possessing at least one of the following values - aesthetic, historical, recreational, biodiversity, or tranquillity.

5.42 The selection of Important Views has been informed by the Assessment of Key Views in Burghclere Parish (2018/2019) which forms part of the Evidence Base. It has drawn on earlier analysis in the Burghclere Village Design Statement (2002) and feedback from parishioners gained during Neighbourhood Plan Drop-in Sessions. In each case, the direction and extent of the land within an Important View has been defined to provide clarity and definition without being all-encompassing (see Plans F-J).

5.43 The policy requires that proposals recognise and take account of these Important Views in their design and where appropriate accord with the requirements of Policy EM1 which requires comprehensive landscaping proposals to ensure that development successfully integrates with the landscape and surroundings.

32 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 92 PLAN 2011-2029

Plan F: Location of Important Views in Burghclere parish

33 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 93 PLAN 2011-2029

Plan G: Important Views to the South of the village

Plan H: Important Views in the village

34 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 94 PLAN 2011-2029

Plan I: Important Views in the southern part of the Parish

Plan J: Important Views in the northern part of the Parish 35 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 95 PLAN 2011-2029

Policy B10: Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity

The Neighbourhood Plan identifies a Green Infrastructure Network, as shown on the Green Infrastructure Maps, for the purposes of promoting access to the countryside and ecological connectivity throughout the parish. The Network comprises Local Green Spaces, informal open spaces, footpaths, woodland, land of biodiversity value including designated environmental and landscape assets, Biodiversity Opportunity Areas, Nature Improvement Areas, or Species and Habitats of Principal Importance.

Development proposals that lie in the broad location of the network are required to have full regard to maintaining and improving the network, including delivering a ‘net gain’ to general biodiversity assets in the design of their layouts, landscaping schemes and public open space provisions.

Development proposals that will lead to the extension of the Network will be supported, provided they are consistent with all other relevant policies of the development plan.

5.44 The policy supports Local Plan Policy EM5 on Green Infrastructure by defining a network of green infrastructure assets in Burghclere parish as a means of increasing connection to the countryside and of improving local biodiversity through connecting habitats. It promotes the adopted Green Infrastructure Strategy for the Borough and provides local emphasis to Policy EM4 – Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation, in respect of requiring all relevant development proposals in the Parish to provide net gains in biodiversity.

5.45 The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 places a biodiversity duty on all public authorities, (including local authorities) to have regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. Section 40 states that “Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity.” This duty aims to raise the profile of biodiversity across the public sector and ensure that biodiversity conservation is at the heart of policymaking and service delivery for local planning authorities.

5.46 There are a number of opportunities for habitat creation and restoration that have been identified by Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre (HBIC) as part of the to Headley Biodiversity Opportunity Area (BOA) – see Plan K insofar as it affects Burghclere Parish. This is not a statutory designation and does not infer a constraint to development or land use. A considerable number of Biodiversity Priority Habitats have been recognised within the Parish at Map L, several of those in the immediate vicinity of Burghclere Village (see Plan M).

5.47 Other notable areas that offer opportunities to promote biodiversity such as the trees and verges framing the approach to Burghclere from Newtown on Well Street, Well Street along the Recreation Ground, the approach from Adbury to Burghclere, and the Ox Drove have also been identified by HBIC as BOAs.

5.48 The policy therefore requires that all development proposals that lie within the broad location of the Network should consider how they may improve connectivity, or at the very least do not undermine its integrity of connecting spaces and habitats. 36 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 96 PLAN 2011-2029

This may mean that scheme layouts, access points, landscape schemes and amenity spaces are designed to contribute to the effectiveness of the Network where possible and without undermining other planning policy objectives. In some cases, proposals will enable the creation of new green infrastructure assets that extend the benefits of the Network. They will be supported provided they are appropriate in other respects.

37 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 97 PLAN 2011-2029

Page 98 Page

Plan K: Biodiversity Action Plan Habitats & Designated Sites -within the Burghclere Parish boundaries

38 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Plan L: Burghclere Green Infrastructure Network

39 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 99 PLAN 2011-2029

Page 100 Page

Plan M: Burghclere Village Green Infrastructure Network

40 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Policy B11: Local Green Spaces

The Neighbourhood Plan designates the following locations, as shown on the Policies Maps, as Local Green Spaces:

LGS1 Memorial Garden, Portal Hall Grounds; LGS2 War Memorial Green LGS3 Green between Church of the Ascension and the School House LGS4 Old Railway Line (North of Harts Lane)

New development will not be permitted on land designated as Local Green Space, unless very special circumstances can be demonstrated.

5.49 This policy proposes a number of important green spaces in the Parish - see Plan N - to be identified and protected by their designation as Local Green Space in accordance with paragraph 99 and 100 of the NPPF, drawn on consultation responses from the local community. Plans O and P show these in greater detail. The policy has the effect of managing development proposals in line with the NPPF provisions in the Green Belt, which prevent any development of the land unless the ‘very special circumstances’ test can be met. Furthermore, it complements B&DBC’s Green Infrastructure Strategy (November 2018) in consideration of health and well-being, recreation and leisure, and biodiversity factors.

5.50 This policy has been informed by the Burghclere Assessment of Local Green Space Report, included in the Evidence Base. The Report examines green infrastructure assets in the Parish, including those that already benefit from other designations, and describes how each identified Local Green Space meets the tests set out in national policy.

41 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 101 PLAN 2011-2029

Page 102 Page

Plan N: Proposed Local Green Space

42 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Plan O: Proposed Local Green Space – LGS 1, 2 & 3

Plan P: Proposed Local Green Space LGS 4

43 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 103 PLAN 2011-2029

Policy B12: Community Facilities

Proposals that will result in the unnecessary loss of a community facility, such as those listed below, will be resisted unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use of the building and ancillary land is no longer viable or that the use can be satisfactorily re-located for the ongoing benefit of the local community:

i. The Portal Hall, Church Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9HX ii. The Millennium Garden, Church Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9HX iii. The Allotments, Church Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9HX iv. The Village Playground, Harts Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9JD v. The Village Car Park, Harts Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9JD vi. The Recreational Field, Harts Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9JD vii. Burghclere Sports Club, Harts Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9JD viii. Church of Ascension, Burghclere, RG20 9HX ix. Sandham Memorial Chapel, Harts Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9JT x. Carpenters Arms, Harts Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9JY xi. Carnarvon Arms, Winchester Road, Whitway, Burghclere, RG20 9LE xii. Burghclere Primary School, Church Lane, Burghclere, RG20 9HT xiii. The Clere School, Earlstone Common, Burghclere, RG20 9HP

Proposals to improve the viability of an established community use of the buildings and ancillary land by way of its extension or partial redevelopment will be supported, provided the design of the scheme and the resulting increase in use are appropriate in design terms and will not harm the amenities of adjoining residential properties.

5.51 The policy identifies those community facilities (buildings and land) that will be protected from a change of use and that encourages proposals to enable the facilities to remain viable community assets, in line with Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Local Plan policy CN8 Community, Leisure and Cultural Facilities. It is recognised that the Burghclere Primary School Playing fields is already bound by Section 77 of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1998 which 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.

Policy B13: Tourism

Proposals to expand an existing tourist attraction will be supported, provided that the scheme has sufficient off-street car parking space; has regard to the amenities of adjoining residential properties; and is of a scale appropriate to its location.

5.52 The existing tourist attractions in the parish include the National Trust property, Sandham Memorial Chapel, which draw a number of visitors per year. There are many popular walking footpaths, such as the Brenda Parker Trail, as well as the Commons, which draw walking groups, schools and local families. Within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Beacon Hill is oft frequented, although mostly from passing tourist traffic. The biggest local draw is Highclere Castle and its many events, attended by people from across the country and

44 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 104 PLAN 2011-2029

around the world. Although only a small part is located in the parish it too contributes to the tourist economy in Burghclere.

5.53 For the most part the key attractions have their own plans and programmes; the principal benefit to the parish is through provision of accommodation and meals and are in part season or weather dependent. Nevertheless, the local initiative to build a steam model railway track around the recreation ground has seen other enthusiasts, families and friends flock to events that benefit the Sports Club and other local outlets.

5.54 Tourists and visitors are welcome and benefit local economic activity. Those facilities require support, maintenance and enhancement, whilst respecting the character of the local area and AONB. Engagement and dialogue with the relevant managing authorities can benefit the use of these sites and contribute to increased employment and prosperity. The policy is intended to support the growth of the tourist economy by protecting existing tourist attractions and encouraging investment in the tourism offer of the area.

Policy B14 – Car Parking

In addition to the provisions of relevant Local Plan policies, all new parking should be provided off-street, unless an essential justification can be demonstrated. Proposals to establish a new public car park at a suitable location in the village will be supported.

5.55 The policy seeks to address car parking challenges affecting many residents of the village by encouraging proposals to establish a new public car park and by ensuring development proposals can demonstrate they will include adequate off- street car parking spaces within their schemes. This can include using residential frontages to create new car parking spaces providing there is no negative impact on the existing boundary treatment.

5.56 Basingstoke and Deane’s Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2018) provides further detail to the adopted policies of the Local Plan, specifically Policies CN9 and EM10, and replaces the previous 2008 (updated 2012) version and the Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards (2002). The levels of provision required varies across the borough to reflect the more rural nature of some settlements and assists in maintaining vitality and viability in smaller settlements where alternative modes of transport may not be so readily available. Although, the village of Burghclere is well connected to its surrounding towns, villages and stations, journeys through necessity are essentially by car. The parking standards for Burghclere are therefore those set out for a rural settlement.

5.57 Car parking is in short supply in the village. An analysis for on-street and off- street car parking space demonstrates where demand outstrips supply (see Plan Q overleaf). While on-street parking can restrict vehicle speeds through the village, it also increases the risk of an accident when overtaking parked vehicles. The design of new development must therefore recognise the dependence of village life on private transport and provide adequate off-road parking. Although parking on- street on Harts Lane is commonplace, Church Lane in particular suffers from

45 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 105 PLAN 2011-2029

bottlenecks in school term time, during the many events held at the Church of Ascension, Portal Hall, Burghclere Primary School, the Sports Club and on the Recreation Ground where on-street or existing car parking arrangements cannot meet the demand. Temporary (and only on request) parking in the field next to the Church mitigates the problem but is not of itself a solution. The policy therefore allows for new spaces to be created as required by the development plan and, potentially, a new public car park in the centre of the village.

46 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 106 PLAN 2011-2029

Page 107 Page

Plan Q: Burghclere Village Car Parking analysis

47 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

6. IMPLEMENTATION

6.1 The Neighbourhood Plan will be implemented through Basingstoke & Deane Council consideration and determination of planning applications for development in the Parish.

Development Management

6.2 The Parish Council will use a combination of the Local Plan and this Neighbourhood Plan’s policies to inform and determine its planning application decisions. The Parish Council is a statutory consultee on planning applications made in the Parish and it will be made aware of any future planning applications or alterations to those applications by the planning authority. It will seek to ensure that the Neighbourhood Plan policies have been identified and applied correctly by applicants and by officers in their decision reports.

6.3 Where necessary, the Parish Council may seek to persuade the Secretary of State to call-in a planning application that it considers is in conflict with the Neighbourhood Plan but which the planning authority has deemed to consent. Similarly, it may also seek to persuade the Secretary of State to recover an appeal of a refused application, where the conflict with one or more Neighbourhood Plan policies has been important in the reasons for refusal. In both cases, the Parish Council will do so if it considers matters of national policy significance (for neighbourhood planning) are raised.

Local Infrastructure Improvements

6.4 Where opportunities arise through Section 106 agreements (or through the Community Infrastructure Levy) to secure financial contributions to invest in improving local infrastructure, the Parish Council will review the evidence base and community consultations for the Neighbourhood Plan to inform its view in liaising with the local planning authorities. A preliminary list has been set out below. This is in addition to the infrastructure projects that are proposed to be delivered through site specific policies in this Neighbourhood Plan. Some of these have been collated as: 1. Contributing towards enhancing in-village car park facilities e.g. a new car park. 2. Repair and renovation of the Sports Club (replacement might also be considered). 3. Portal Hall renovations: i. replace current windows for the original design. ii. upgrade kitchen. iii. renovate flooring. iv. renew lighting. 4. Existing Recreation Ground Play Area – add additional play equipment and equipment for all age groups, including the elderly. 5. Resolving sewerage and storm water flooding problems in the village.

48 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 108 PLAN 2011-2029

Other Non-Planning Matters

6.5 During the process of preparing the Neighbourhood Plan, there have been many ideas for improving or addressing current problems in the Parish that lie outside the scope of the land use planning system to control. The Parish Council has noted these issues and will take them forward through its day-to-day business and in partnership with the local community and relevant parties.

Appendix:

1. Design Statement.

49 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 109 PLAN 2011-2029

POLICY & INSET MAPS

50 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOODPage 110 PLAN 2011-2029

INSET MAP Page 111 Page

51 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

INSET MAP 2

Page 112 Page

Burghclere Village Local Heritage Assets

52 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

SCHEDULE OF EVIDENCE

The list below contains all documents prepared, collected and reviewed in the process of preparing the Plan.

BDBC Neighbourhood Plan SEA/HRA Screening Report – Burghclere Nov 2018

Burghclere NP SEA Scoping Report V2.0 (AECOM March 2019)

Burghclere NP Final Sustainability Appraisal Report (AECOM Nov 2019)

Burghclere NP Basic Conditions Statement

Burghclere NP Consultation Statement

Burghclere NP supporting documents:

Site Selection Report (20191106)

Major Development within the NWD AONB (20190716)

Traffic and Parking (20190914)

Tourism (20190914)

Green Infrastructure (20190916)

Local Greenspaces (20190916)

Key Views (20190916)

Design Statement (20190914)

Business (20181119)

Rural Business Hub (20181117)

Business Needs Survey Report (20191106)

Community Facilities Buildings and Land Report (20180627)

Residential Garden Land Policy Justification (20191010)

Land off Harts Lane/Winchester Road Supporting Documents

Access Technical Note

Arboricultural Impact Assessment

Flood Risk and Drainage Note

Historical Environment Note

Initial Landscape and Visual Appraisal

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal

BDBC Local Plan, Supplementary Planning Documents and Evidence base

Basingstoke and Deane Landscape Character Appraisal (2002)

North Wessex Down AONB Management Plan 2019 – 2024 (Draft)

National Design Guide (October 2019)

Page 113 53 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Appendix 1 to Burghclere NP Burghclere NP-Design Statement

The purpose of this design statement is to provide planners, architects, design technicians and applicants with a framework to assess design priorities of future physical development in the parish. It informs users which aspects and features of special architectural and historic interest are considered by the community to make a positive, important and special contribution. This statement is also aimed at encouraging all residents to continue an active interest in the future shaping of the natural and built environment of the parish as a whole.

This statement is material consideration for development applications in the parish and forms an integral part of the Neighbourhood Plan. Its use will contribute to the delivery of development proposals that protect and enhance the character of Burghclere village and outlying areas. It first sets out principles, context and policy guidance, describes the local landscape before considering Burghclere village itself in order to focus on detailed issues such as layout, building design and issues concerning materials and detailing. Moreover, the description and details noted allow for easy reference when conducting a contextual survey and analysis both within the village townscape and without.

Principles, Context and Character

Parish development aims to create places for people first and foremost. Co- operation, collaboration and transparency are essential hallmarks of the development process to ensure well designed, high quality environments. Designs must retain the qualities of the traditions of the area, maintaining a strong sense of place, continuity of form and richness of variety and detail. Innovation, modern design and technological change all have a place in shaping the environment of the future and can be an original response if done sympathetically and in context. Overuse of standard designs, not informed by the specific site context will not be acceptable, nor will pastiche or replicating mediocre design. Inclusion of high quality, well designed external environments is the essence of this policy as they will support Green Infrastructure initiatives and importantly contribute to the well-being and health of the local community.

Planning Policy

This Statement draws from and is linked to the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), B&DBC’s Local Plan and its Supplementary Planning Documents dealing inter alia with Housing, Design and Sustainability, Parking, Conservation and Historic Environment, and Landscape and Biodiversity. Policies contained within this document reflect the intent of the aforementioned and are further tailored to the specific circumstances of the parish.

Landscape Overview

Burghclere parish has a varied geology of clays, silts and sands, giving rise to a diverse mix of soils and a mosaic of ancient semi-natural woodlands, plantations, remnant heathland and open farmland areas. Sitting to the South of Newbury and the lower Kennet valley this is referred to as Lowland Mosaic by the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (NWD AONB) and permits a wide diversity of flora and fauna.

Page 114 54 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

The northern boundary of the Parish runs along the River Enborne from which the ground gently rises to more densely wooded flat terrain interspersed by low density hamlets such as Adbury, Adbury Holt and Tothill, with adjoining Burghclere Common, the Herbert Plantation and Earlstone Common - all of which are Countryside Heritage Sites - before arriving at Burghclere village itself. There are several small streams and springs in the lower part of the parish that feed into the River Enborne. Most of the village is on level terrain and to the North and West looks across open fields towards the A34 and the commons. To the South and East, the ground is more open, principally farmland with occasional woods and copses and offers outstanding views towards Sydmonton, the Watership Down ridgeline and Old Burghclere, which is itself overlooked by Ladle and Beacon Hills that straddle the A34 as it passes South towards Winchester. The parish is fortunate in not only having a large number of designated conservation sites; the NWD AONB, Ancient Woodlands, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Sites of Interest for Nature Conservation (SINC), but also many listed buildings.

Essential characteristics: Burghclere village

The village itself is largely linear and is orientated NE-SW. A map of Burghclere settlement boundary is at Annex A. Bisecting the southern half of the parish is the NWD AONB, which follows the line of the old Didcot-Newbury-Southampton railway through the south-western segment of the village. Growing haphazardly over the last 200 years, the middle of the village centres around the Church of the Ascension, War Memorial, Portal Hall and Village Green. The Church and Portal Hall date from the mid-late 19th century and make a cohesive and visually coherent association.

The bulk of Burghclere village lies inside the designated Settlement Policy Boundary (SPB) and comprises of a mix of building types in terms of age, size, form, style, construction and history. Houses are generally spread along the Harts Lane and Church Lane, with development running North up Well St. Some domestic and rural buildings date from the 17th century or earlier. Several developments branch off from Harts Lane, the main thoroughfare. Although many houses are set back from the roads behind hedges that soften the streetscape, modern houses can be found adjacent or opposite older ones as a consequence of its historical growth and a less than coherent approach to planning over the years.

At the southerly end a small number of houses lie on Coopers Lane that leads to Grade II listed Budds Farm, which dates to the 18th century. Entering the village on Harts Lane one of the finest examples of an early primitive Methodist Chapel, built by the Reverend Thomas Russell in 1864, has been converted into a residence known as Parsons Corner. The last remaining pub in the village is the Carpenter’s Arms, dating from the mid 19th century, which has undergone extensive modernisation but has retained its historic façade and interior. Nearby is the National Trust property Sandham Memorial Chapel, built in the 20th century, which contains the internationally important paintings by Sir Stanley Spencer undertaken between 1926 and 1932. Parking for visitors has recently been provided in a field opposite.

To the East of the railway bridge a narrow road, Pound Lane, runs NE to another small set of properties, which then turns into unpaved track. In 2017, five modern houses were built in the grounds of Sandham House, which blend in well; several of the houses beyond are bungalows and have minimal impact on the landscape on that side of the village.

Almost opposite Pound Lane, Spring Lane runs SE off which lie a smaller number of houses, some of which date back to the 18/19 th centuries. Continuing NE along Harts Page 115 55 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Lane, there are two new developments off the main road; Laurel Bank and Stembridge Close. Beyond are a collection of large houses of varying styles and ages, with extensive gardens that provide an attractive streetscape until Breachfield and Coronation Close are reached. This is a relatively modern development, built in stages during the 1950s. As a block these houses are less sympathetic to the earlier style of development within the village, fronting respective roads, with less hedging acting as a screen.

Further to the East is the village centre and beyond that a number of 20 th century houses that all sit comfortably in the streetscape of this area. A development of 18 houses in Cobbetts View was built in the last decade. Although modern in design they have been sympathetically constructed, barely visible to those passing on Harts Lane, and have been well landscaped. Limes Avenue holds another small housing settlement, after which there are a series of small houses that front Harts Lane, including the old Post Office and the Queen’s pub that have been converted for private use. After the junction of Harts Lane and Well Street, Ayres Lane runs NW, along which are a number of properties before the intersection with the Ox Drove.

Running East from the village centre is Church Lane, on which sits Burghclere Primary School, an old building dating back to the 19 th century, with a series of houses beyond of mixed style but which conform to the village character. Opposite these is Elkington Close, a series of brick bungalows built in the 1970s, many of which are in housing association use.

Within the village are four schools; St Michael’s on Harts Lane, owned and operated by the Society of St Pius X, Burghclere pre-school, which uses the facilities in and outside the Portal Hall, Burghclere Primary School on Church Lane, and the Clere School, a co-educational community secondary school on the C183 Aldern Bridge Road. The latter is the most recent construction dating from the 1960s and boasts a fine new sports extension, although its notable slanted roof is somewhat incongruous in a rural village setting.

Architectural Character and Quality of Buildings

Hampshire County Council’s Historic Environment Record (HER) lists in its Archeology and Historic Buildings Record over 257 entries for Burghclere, attesting to the historical richness of the parish.

There are 57 listed buildings in the parish including 3 Grade 1 and one Grade II*. Five listed buildings are within Burghclere’s SPB.

There are buildings within the village that are not recorded or listed but which have unusual design features or local historical resonance. When the Village Design Statement (VDS) was compiled in 2001, an informal survey was carried out and a number of buildings were listed separately that recognised their uniqueness but conferred no special privileges or protection. This list was submitted to B&DBC with the VDS who, in 2007 compiled a ‘Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest - Burghclere’ (BAHI). Another survey was carried out in 2018 and a further set were noted and it is intended to add those to the BAHI as well; these are indicated below.

Page 116 56 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Burghclere village

In the village centre the Grade II Church of the Ascension dominates. A slate-roofed Anglican church, it was constructed in 1838 and enlarged in 1875. Originally with a plain wide nave with shallow transepts and chancel and with a western tower, it was extended eastwards by the attachment of a long chancel, with a south aisle and north vestry. The interior has a chancel screen of open traceried timber work above a stone dado wall, steps, stalls, communion rail, sedilia, and brass eagle lectern.

Adjacent to the church is Burghclere War Memorial, designated at Grade II as a permanent testament to the sacrifice made by the community in two World Wars and as a simple tribute to the Fallen of Burghclere. Standing in a grass triangle at the junction of Harts and Church Lanes, the memorial has a visual relationship with the Portal Hall and the Church of the Ascension.

Opposite the church is the Grade II listed Portal Hall (sometimes referred to as Parish Room and House) built in 1890. It is a commemorative building in the Arts and Crafts style, comprising a main block of 6 bays, with a dwelling attached at the east end. It has a steeply-pitched tile roof and ribbed chimney stacks.

Returning to the SW end of the village Holmbush Cottage is a very pretty building of early 19th century construction of red brick and occasional blue header and a slate roof, listed in the HER.

On Coopers Lane, Budds Farmhouse is Grade II listed and dates from the 18th early 19th century. On its West elevation of 2 storeys are 6 windows and hipped tile roof with molded brick cornice to the eaves. Painted brick walling is in Flemish bond, with some flint panels, first floor band, cambered openings, with molding to the plinth, and mid 19 th cast-iron casements with large diamond design. The house is associated with William Cobbett as being the starting point of his Rural Rides in 1821. The17 th century Coopers Farmhouse is Grade II listed and its stable and three barns are on the HER. Ashold Farm, although not on the HER is for BAHI consideration. Parsons Corner on Harts Lane has already been mentioned as a fine example of an early Methodist Chapel with red brick wall with buff brick window dressings and gauged arches. The Carpenters Arms is a mid-19 th century building, HER listed, with plain rendered walls, probably covering brick, with a single storey ancillary building to the East. Both Laburnum Cottage and the outbuilding to its West are HER listed; the gable contains a diamond with the date 1677. Opposite is White Roding, a private house of red brick with attractive roof ridges proposed as a BAHI. Sandham Memorial Chapel, owned by the National Trust, is a plain rectangular block of red brickwork and is Grade II listed. The South side is arranged in symmetry with a single storey almshouse on each side and in front, an attractive formal garden.

At the junction of Pound and Harts Lane sits Grange Cottage, a white painted brick house of early 18 th century, HER listed with a plain clay tile roof. A short way up Pound Lane is Sandham House, where Sir Stanley Spencer lived during the time he painted the murals. Although now part of Sandham Close and not easily visible from the road, the building merits being included as a BAHI, as do Heath House and Frogmill, the two attractive houses next to Sandham further up the lane.

To the South of Harts Lane is Spring Lane, leading to a number of houses before it joins Well Street. Of note is The Old Station, built in 1885 and sympathetically converted from its original use to a private home. Since it retains much of its original brickwork and looks it is already listed as a BAHI.

Page 117 57 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Opposite the War Memorial on Harts Lane, set back from the road, is The Croft, a large house dating from the late 19 th /early 20 th century that, together with Folly Cottages, a whitewashed set of workers’ cottages that date from the 1920s are worthy for BAHI incorporation. Sitting at the junction of Harts Lane, Ayres Lane and Well Street is Ladle House, HER listed, formerly the Queen’s pub, circa 1867, built with a symmetrical façade and its main door beneath a slated veranda roof.

At the junction of Well Street and Church Lane is Reeves Cottage dating from 1833, red brick with gabled and hipped clay plain tiled roofs, which has recently been sympathetically extended. Beyond that on Well Street is The Old Rectory, a two- storey former rectory dating from the 19 th and 20 th centuries. Both are HER listed.

On Church Lane is The Old School Cottage, a low white-painted building which merits BAHI inclusion given its unusual roofline. Burghclere Primary School (HER listed) dates to the early-mid 19 th century and comprises a tall white-painted brick single-storey main block with attached two-storey masters House at the western end.

Materials

Buildings from the Georgian period have sash or casement windows, hipped roofs, some with slate coverings and overhanging eaves. Late Victorian buildings are mainly in red wire-cut bricks with typically Victorian ornate gables and other embellishments such as denticulation. Many of the older cottages and some more recent buildings have roofs with hipped ends, being covered with plain clay or concrete tiles. Several have interesting and ornate chimneys and a number of traditional farm buildings have weather-boarded elevations. A few older buildings are thatched, adding to the diverse character of the parish.

Brick is the predominant material, of a variety of colours and sometimes colour- washed. Some buildings have tile-hung elevations. Slate covering are used on a number of late Victorian/early 20 th century buildings, particularly in Heatherwold. Many of the originally modest houses have been extended considerably to a high standard that blend in with the original and harmonise with neighbouring properties, but examples of poor quality extensions with architectural features out of keeping are also evident. On some of the larger plots infilling has occurred, and the scope for this is increasingly difficult to manage without detriment to the character and appeal of the settlement.

Trees and vegetation

Burghclere village is blessed with extensive arboreal cover that adds significantly to the rural aspect of the village; the roads running North from the village especially so. Breach Copse, although in private hands, has been a local feature since the 1800s. Many fine specimens are within gardens or properties and collectively contribute to the character of the area as a whole.

Green Space

The agricultural and equine fields within and around Burghclere village create a rural ambience, engagement with the countryside and provide attractive views and tranquil vistas. Across the parish open spaces offer long-distance views to or from the high Downs, while wooded areas and dales offer seclusion and intimacy thanks to the many mature trees and shrubs growing in gardens and the wild. Green Spaces have been identified and a separate report provided.

Page 118 58 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Footpaths and Byways

The parish is honeycombed with over forty footpaths and ridgeways. All are much used by the community and visiting walkers from further afield. Future development should include consideration of how to improve the existing layout or create new recreational opportunities.

Views

Important views have been identified within the village looking in as well as out. A Key View report has been compiled and includes other significant views recorded around the Parish.

Of particular note are those that demonstrate the close links of the village with the countryside on to the North from Pound Lane/Ox Drove, and to the South looking both out to the Downs from several points as well as looking into the village. Development in either of these areas would significantly impact on the rural character and feel of the village.

Design Guidance

General Principles

To safeguard, preserve and enhance the appearance and special character of Burghclere parish and the Settlement Policy Boundary area, the following guidance should be considered when preparing and assessing the appropriateness of planning applications and also any development that might affect the visual characteristics of the settlement areas within and without the AONB.

Development should in all regards be in compliance with policies in this Plan and respect the historic pattern of existing building lines and building orientation of the immediately adjacent plots where a consistent pattern is prevalent. Where a pattern is not clear proposals should reflect the wider mix of historic building lines and building orientation in the relevant area. The building heights of any such developments should not exceed the prevailing roof line of the adjacent plots.

Any new building works should be designed not as a separate entity but should be sympathetic in form and scale with the existing historic or traditional buildings within the local area.

Any new building works should use materials that complement those used in adjoining or adjacent buildings, particularly when such buildings are listed, include features of particular visual interest or are listed as BAHI.

Although hedges cannot be specifically protected, existing tracts of native or traditional hedging, including those hedgerows indicated on policy maps should be retained and where possible enhanced.

Areas of open space and gaps between buildings which contribute to the character of the area should be protected from development.

There should be no development that negatively impacts on the character of a key view into, out of or through the area as shown on the policy maps.

The rural character of the roads and streetscape in the area should be maintained. Page 119 59 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029

Annex A Appendix 1 Burghclere NP Burghclere Settlement Boundary

Page 120 Page

60 BURGHCLERE PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2011-2029