A Broad Range of Issues Need to Be
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NFNPA 37/05 AUTHORITY MEETING – 20 OCTOBER 2005 HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL AND PUSH CONSULTATION ON DISTRICT-LEVEL HOUSEBUILDING TARGETS Report by: Peter Nelson, Policy Planning Adviser Where shall we live? Consultation on District-Level Housebuilding Targets By Hampshire County Council and the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) Summary: 1. Extensive consultation is being undertaken on District-Level housebuilding targets by Hampshire County Council and PUSH in relation to the South East Plan which sets targets for the location and amount of new housing across the region between 2006 and 2026. Responses are required by the fixed deadline of Friday 21 October. 2. This paper analyses the available information and sets out views on the potential effects of the options on the New Forest National Park. Recommendations: 1. That the Authority endorses the paper’s findings and authorises the Chief Executive to submit the report’s conclusions to Hampshire County Council. Resources: Not significant. Other major considerations: None 1 NFNPA 37/05 Where shall we live? Consultation on District-Level Housebuilding Targets By Hampshire County Council and the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) Introduction 1. This paper discusses the options that have been developed by Hampshire County Council and the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) for allocating sub-regional housing targets as part of the preparation of the South East Plan. A copy of the consultation document ‘Where shall we live’ can be seen on www.hants.gov.uk/environment/downloads/where-shall-we-live.pdf or a copy can be obtained from the Authority offices. 2. Proposed answers to the questions posed in the consultation paper are given in the text. If members wish to clarify any technical issues prior to the Authority meeting they should contact the Chief Executive in the first instance. Background 3. The South East Regional Assembly completed the first stage of work on the Regional Spatial Strategy in July 2005 and has defined the housebuilding target for Hampshire of 6100 new homes per year during 2006-2026. This total is subdivided between three areas as follows: • North Hampshire - 1300 new homes per year, • Central Hampshire and New Forest – 800 new homes per year, • South Hampshire – 4000 new homes per year. 4. Hampshire and PUSH have prepared options for the allocation of these housing requirements at a sub-regional level and is consulting on the proposals. Following the consultation the PUSH proposals will be submitted to the Regional Assembly on 9 December. The full assembly will consider the sub-regional housing allocations on 1 March 2006, after which SEERA will submit part 2 of the South East Plan to Government on 31 March. Government will consult on the South East Plan in the summer and the plan will be subject to an Examination in Public in winter 2006/7. Proposed Allocations 5. North Hampshire is part of the Western Corridor, constituting a growth area which includes parts of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Surrey. There are significant environmental constraints within the area including the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area. At a practical level, development in this corridor would not impact directly on the New Forest National Park (it would of course add to the pressure for recreational access arising from growth in population in both the SE and SW regions). 2 6. In total around 26,000 new homes are proposed in North Hampshire over 20 years but of these 22,000 could be built on sites already earmarked or located within towns. Three options are proposed for locating the 26,000 new houses. These are: • Option 1 The majority (18,000 homes) to be concentrated in and on the edges of Basingstoke town with 3,200 in Hart District and 4800 in Rushmoor Borough on earmarked land or previously used land. • Option 2 Only 1600 new homes in Rushmoor Borough (to protect the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area) with 21,000 in and around Basingstoke and 3,200 in Hart District. • Option 3 A more even distribution across the three districts providing for 14,200 new homes in and around Basingstoke, 5200 in Hart District including some Greenfield sites and 6,200 new homes in Rushmoor Borough. Proposed Response: The National Park Authority favours Option 2, which avoids environmentally sensitive areas (affected in Option 1) and concentrates development in and around Basingstoke. (As a general principle, development of self-contained settlements or extensions to existing centres is to be preferred over development of dispersed or green field sites). 7. Central Hampshire and New Forest includes not only the core area of the National Park but also the parts of New Forest District lying immediately to the west and south of the national park. Part of the proposed South Downs National Park also lies within this part of Hampshire. 8. The South East Plan proposes 16,000 new homes in Central Hampshire and New Forest over the 20 year period of which 14,000 are expected to be built on sites already earmarked for housing and on other sites within towns. This leaves new sites to be found for 2000 or so new homes. 9. Five options are being considered for locating the 2000 homes. These are: Option 1 Winchester (development at Barton Farm) Option 2 Andover Option 3 Whitehill/Bordon (on land currently occupied by the Ministry of Defence) Option 4 Some at Andover and some at Whitehill/Bordon Option 5 Shared amongst all the above and the other main settlements in the area 10. All of the options envisage little housebuilding in the part of New Forest District lying within Central Hampshire and New Forest, reflecting the extent of the New Forest National Park (the maximum allocation being 100 new homes under Option 5). This represents a lower rate of provision within New Forest District than past house building rates. 3 Proposed Response The National Park Authority sees substantial advantage in Options 1 and 2 due to the proximity of the proposed sites to existing centres and rail links. Option 3 is noted to have some environmental disadvantages, while Options 4 and 5 result in greater dispersal of new housing which is less sustainable. 11. South Hampshire (including Southampton and Portsmouth) is treated differently from other parts of Hampshire because the sub-region has under- performed economically and contains significant pockets of deprivation. Most of the area is designated by Government as a Priority Area for Economic Generation (PAER). The Partnership for Urban South Hampshire seeks to increase economic growth to around 3.5% by 2026 from its existing level of 2.5-2.7%. 12. Given this background, the South East Plan proposes that 4000 new dwellings should be built each year in South Hampshire amounting to 80,000 new homes by 2026. A phased programme of development is proposed with sites already earmarked for development and other previously used land being used exclusively in the period 2006-2011. This would be followed by intensification of development within existing towns and urban extensions from 2011-2016. Further intensification of development and the introduction of green field development on two ‘Strategic Development Areas’ at Hedge End and Fareham would characterise the final phases 2016-2026. Proposed Response Enhanced economic performance and managed growth for the sub-region is recognised and supported, but this development needs to be planned in ways that safeguard national park purposes and ensure that the New Forest’s resources are protected and can be enjoyed by all. The National Park Authority considers that proposals for growth in South Hampshire will increase pressures on the New Forest National Park through increased use of the strategic transport routes through the park, demand for construction materials and other resources, waste management and most significantly the impact of recreational activity, especially along the eastern margin of the park. It is essential that new communities are planned as self- contained centres, with adequate provision of recreational facilities. The sub- region's green infrastructure and public transport requires radical improvement and major investment if the new development is to be sustainable. 13. In order to achieve 80,000 new homes within 20 years it is envisaged that 11,000 will be built on sites already earmarked with a further 38,000 on other previously used land within the cities and towns. 14. Consultees are invited to state whether the figure of 38,000 is appropriate, but the question is unrealistic in that the environmental, social and economic consequences of this intensification in development have not been assessed as part of the plan, although there is discussion of the issues involved (see Development in Urban Areas pages 5-6). The proposals contained in ‘Where shall we live’ are due to be subjected to a Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment, but this will follow the consultation and cannot be used to inform choices. 4 Proposed Response In the absence of any analysis of the social, economic and environmental consequences of the house building figures and various options presented it is not possible to express a view on the proposed increases in housing density within existing residential areas. The principle of building on allocated sites and in urban areas in preference to green field sites is fully accepted but the point at which intensification results in ‘town-cramming’ cannot be assessed without detailed study. 15. Having maximised new development within existing urban areas, PUSH proposes a number of urban extensions and the creation of two Strategic Development Areas. 16. The two Strategic Development Areas would represent distinct new communities each comprising around 9000-10000 new homes of various sizes and types including affordable housing, together with sites for employment shops, schools, health and community facilities.